Mickey Endito [off-list ref] writes:
The variable D is never defined in test t5582, more severely the test
fails if D is defined by something outside the test suite, so remove
this spurious line.
Wow. Well spotted.
When D is left unset, we end up executing
cd "" && ...
and it explains why nobody noticed the breakage for nearly a year
since c0192df6 (refspec: add support for negative refspecs,
2020-09-30) was written.
Unlike the apparent
copy-and-paste source, this is a more modern script that limits the
chdir inside subshells to avoid moving around in the main flow of
the test, and the fix proposed here looks the most sensible.
quoted hunk
Signed-off-by: Mickey Endito <redacted>
---
To reproduce a failure do
D=/some/path/which/does/not/exist t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh
Note: The variable D seems to be a reminiscent similar to t/t5510-fetch.sh,
which defines "D=$(pwd)". If you want to adopt that way, then you have
to code a fix yourself. ;-)
t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh b/t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh
index e5d2e79ad3..7a80e47c2b 100755
--- a/t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh
+++ b/t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh
@@ -105,7 +105,6 @@ test_expect_success "fetch with negative pattern refspec does not expand prefix"
'
test_expect_success "fetch with negative refspec avoids duplicate conflict" '
- cd "$D" &&
(
cd one &&
git branch dups/a &&
--
2.30.2
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 04:32:39PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Mickey Endito [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
The variable D is never defined in test t5582, more severely the test
fails if D is defined by something outside the test suite, so remove
this spurious line.
Wow. Well spotted.
When D is left unset, we end up executing
cd "" && ...
and it explains why nobody noticed the breakage for nearly a year
since c0192df6 (refspec: add support for negative refspecs,
2020-09-30) was written.
Unlike the apparent
copy-and-paste source, this is a more modern script that limits the
chdir inside subshells to avoid moving around in the main flow of
the test, and the fix proposed here looks the most sensible.
'grep " cd $" test-results/*.out' shows that there is a similar case
in 't5323-pack-redundant.sh' as well, in test 'master: pack-redundant
works with no packfile'.
quoted
Signed-off-by: Mickey Endito <redacted>
---
To reproduce a failure do
D=/some/path/which/does/not/exist t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh
Note: The variable D seems to be a reminiscent similar to t/t5510-fetch.sh,
which defines "D=$(pwd)". If you want to adopt that way, then you have
to code a fix yourself. ;-)
t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh b/t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh
index e5d2e79ad3..7a80e47c2b 100755
--- a/t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh
+++ b/t/t5582-fetch-negative-refspec.sh
@@ -105,7 +105,6 @@ test_expect_success "fetch with negative pattern refspec does not expand prefix"
'
test_expect_success "fetch with negative refspec avoids duplicate conflict" '
- cd "$D" &&
(
cd one &&
git branch dups/a &&
--
2.30.2
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 08:59:42PM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
quoted
Unlike the apparent
copy-and-paste source, this is a more modern script that limits the
chdir inside subshells to avoid moving around in the main flow of
the test, and the fix proposed here looks the most sensible.
'grep " cd $" test-results/*.out' shows that there is a similar case
in 't5323-pack-redundant.sh' as well, in test 'master: pack-redundant
works with no packfile'.
Hmm. I think that one is different, in that the "cd" is not redundant,
but wrong. But it turns out not to matter to the test. ;)
-- >8 --
Subject: [PATCH] t5323: drop mentions of "master"
Commit 0696232390 (pack-redundant: fix crash when one packfile in repo,
2020-12-16) added one some new tests to t5323. At the time, the sub-repo
we used was called "master". But in a parallel branch, this was switched
to "main".
When the latter branch was merged in 27d7c8599b (Merge branch
'js/default-branch-name-tests-final-stretch', 2021-01-25), some of those
spots caused textual conflicts, but some (for tests that were far enough
away from other changed code) were just semantic. The merge resolution
fixed up most spots, but missed this one.
Even though this did impact actual code, it turned out not to fail the
tests. Running 'cd "$master_repo"' ended up staying in the same
directory, running the test in the main trash repo instead of the
sub-repo. But because the point of the test is checking behavior when
there are no packfiles, it worked in either repo (since both are empty
at this point in the script).
Reported-by: SZEDER Gábor <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <redacted>
---
t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh b/t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh
index 8b01793845..8dbbcc5e51 100755
--- a/t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh
+++ b/t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh
@@ -114,9 +114,9 @@ test_expect_success 'setup main repo' '
create_commits_in "$main_repo" A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R
'
-test_expect_success 'master: pack-redundant works with no packfile' '
+test_expect_success 'main: pack-redundant works with no packfile' '
(
- cd "$master_repo" &&
+ cd "$main_repo" &&
cat >expect <<-EOF &&
fatal: Zero packs found!
EOF
--
2.33.0.394.gce7abe507a