Re: [PATCH] test-lib-functions: fix test_subcommand_inexact

Derrick Stolee [off-list ref] writes:

The full post-condition check requires more test code, but that's not
really a problem. The problem comes in if that test is now too rigid
to future changes in that subcommand. What if the post-conditions
change in a subtle way because of the subcommand does something
differently, but in a way that is not of importance to the top
command?

In this specific case, the test name says that it "packs non-kept
objects", so we can do more here to validate that post-condition
that we care about.

Thanks for clearly laying out the way to think about the issue.  I
agree with all of it, of course ;-)