The purpose of chainlint.sed is to detect &&-chain breakage only within
subshells (one level deep); it doesn't bother checking for top-level
&&-chain breakage since the &&-chain checker built into t/test-lib.sh
should detect broken &&-chains outside of subshells by making them
magically exit with code 117.

Unfortunately, one of the chainlint.sed self-tests has overly intimate
knowledge of this particular division of responsibilities and only cares
about what chainlint.sed itself will produce, while ignoring the fact
that a more all-encompassing linter would complain about a broken
&&-chain outside the subshell. This makes it difficult to re-use the
test with a more capable chainlint implementation should one ever be
developed. Therefore, adjust the test and its "expected" output to
avoid being specific to the tunnel-vision of this one implementation.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <redacted>
---
 t/chainlint/one-liner.expect | 2 +-
 t/chainlint/one-liner.test   | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/t/chainlint/one-liner.expect b/t/chainlint/one-liner.expect
index 237f227349..c64058f7af 100644
--- a/t/chainlint/one-liner.expect
+++ b/t/chainlint/one-liner.expect

@@ -4,6 +4,6 @@
 
 ?!SEMI?!(foo; bar) &&
 ?!SEMI?!(foo; bar) |
-?!SEMI?!(foo; bar) >baz
+?!SEMI?!(foo; bar) >baz &&
 
 (foo "bar; baz")

diff --git a/t/chainlint/one-liner.test b/t/chainlint/one-liner.test
index 69796d7505..be9858fa29 100644
--- a/t/chainlint/one-liner.test
+++ b/t/chainlint/one-liner.test

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 # LINT: top-level one-liner subshell missing internal "&&" and broken &&-chain
 (foo; bar) &&
 (foo; bar) |
-(foo; bar) >baz
+(foo; bar) >baz &&
 
 # LINT: ";" in string not misinterpreted as broken &&-chain
 (foo "bar; baz")

-- 
2.34.1.397.gfae76fe5da