Re: [PATCH v3 20/25] refs: RFC: Reftable support for git-core
From: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-30 13:32:12
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 12:12 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [off-list ref] wrote:
Elsewhere in this series we use the ARRAY_SIZE() macro from git-compat-util.h, can't we also use REALLOC_ARRAY() from the same header here?
Done.
quoted
[...] + if (!(flags & EXPIRE_REFLOGS_DRY_RUN)) { + /* XXX - skip writing records that were not changed. */ + err = reftable_addition_commit(add); + } else { + /* XXX - print something */ + }Aren't these comments covered by some of the failing tests under GIT_TEST_REFTABLE=true? I.e. what I mentioned https://lore.kernel.org/git/877dgch4rn.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/ (local)
The XXX comments are directed at reviewers. I don't know if these places relate to test failures.
quoted
[...] + if (err < 0) { + errno = reftable_error_to_errno(err); + err = -1; + goto done; + }In your proposed fixup for the merger of our topics in https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1054.v3.git.git.1629207607.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/ (local) you have the call to reftable_error_to_errno() here deleted, so isn't this also redundant at this point (and then the reftable_error_to_errno() function can be deleted), or is this errno setting still needed with some of my changes?
No; it's purely informational, but the errno codes aren't a good match, so OK to drop as well.
Can't later tests just use "main" instead of primary with a GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=main, then we can drop this "git_init" wrapper?
Done.
quoted
+initialize () { + rm -rf .git &&Should instead set up a test_when_finished "rm -rf .git" ?
No. The test framework sets up a scratch repo, but the scratch repo doesn't use reftable, so it interferes with the tests.
quoted
+ (GIT_TEST_REFTABLE=1; export GIT_TEST_REFTABLE; git_init) &&This export before calling git_init can surely go away if git_init goes, but alo why export beforehand here, but in later tests in this file we just do a plain: (GIT_TEST_REFTABLE=1 git_init) &&
Done.
quoted
+ mv .git/hooks .git/hooks-disabledIs this "mv" cargo-culted from what test_create_repo() used to do before my-f0d4d398e28 (test-lib: split up and deprecate test_create_repo(), 2021-05-10)? In any case templated hooks are disabled by default (named *.sample), so I don't think this is needed.
Done.
quoted
+ echo hoi >> file.t &&Nit: >>file.t, not ">> file.t".
Dnoe.
quoted
+ git show-ref | sed s/before/after/g > expected &&Don't have "git" on the LHS of a pipe, it'll hide a segfault. Should use a temporary file. Also "s/ > />/g" like above (and in some places below, will stop noting it...).
Done.
quoted
+test_expect_success 'SHA256 support, env' ' + rm -rf .git && + GIT_DEFAULT_HASH=sha256 && export GIT_DEFAULT_HASH && + (GIT_TEST_REFTABLE=1 git_init) && + mv .git/hooks .git/hooks-disabled &&Comments about this .git/hooks-disabled not being needed aside, this seems to be duplicating the initialize() function. I.e. should we not skip the "rm -rf" and "mv" here, and just set GIT_DEFAULT_HASH=sha256 and call initialize? (Better yet, if we get rid of that "git init" wrapper as I noted above, this can just be an argument to "git init", no?
Done.
quoted
[...] + rm -rf .git && + (GIT_TEST_REFTABLE=1 git_init --object-format=sha256) && + mv .git/hooks .git/hooks-disabled &&ditto.
done.
quoted
+ ! git update-ref -d refs/tags/file $INVALID_SHA1 &&Always "test_must_fail git", not "! git".
done.
quoted
[...] +test_expect_success 'clone calls transaction_initial_commit' ' + test_commit message1 file1 && + git clone . cloned && + (test -f cloned/file1 || echo "Fixme.")So this test really tests nothing much, and we should skip the "Fixme" here and have this be test_expect_failure() or something instead?quoted
[...] + git show-ref | cut -f2 -d" " >actual &&Git on LHS of a pipe again.quoted
+# This matches show-ref's output +print_ref() { + echo "$(git rev-parse "$1") $1" +} + +test_expect_success 'peeled tags are stored' ' + initialize && + test_commit file && + git tag -m "annotated tag" test_tag HEAD && + { + print_ref "refs/heads/primary" && + print_ref "refs/tags/file" && + print_ref "refs/tags/test_tag" && + print_ref "refs/tags/test_tag^{}" + } >expect &&Maybe I'm missing something, but wouldn't this print_ref() helper be better as a "git for-each-ref --format" of some sort?quoted
[...] +. "$TEST_DIRECTORY"/lib-httpd.sh +start_httpd + +REPO="$HTTPD_DOCUMENT_ROOT_PATH/repo"Let's split these httpd-needing tests into another test file, see https://lore.kernel.org/git/87bl753i2p.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/ (local) for why.
done. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - Google Munich I work 80%. Don't expect answers from me on Fridays. -- Google Germany GmbH, Erika-Mann-Strasse 33, 80636 Munich Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado