Re: [PATCH v1 3/7] t1010: assert empty output of mktree

Andrei Rybak [off-list ref] writes:

 test_expect_success 'mktree refuses to read ls-tree -r output (1)' '
-	test_must_fail git mktree <all >actual
+	test_must_fail git mktree <all >actual &&
+	test_must_be_empty actual
 '
 
 test_expect_success 'mktree refuses to read ls-tree -r output (2)' '
-	test_must_fail git mktree <all.withsub >actual
+	test_must_fail git mktree <all.withsub >actual &&
+	test_must_be_empty actual
 '

I am ambivalent.  As long as a failing command signals its failure
with its non-zero exit status value, the consumer of the output
should not blindly use the output from such a failing command.  Is
there a strong reason why we want users rely on the command to be
silent when it fails?

An obvious alternative is to stop producing "actual" file, and it
might be a better idea; unless there is a good reason why we should
expect the command to be silent, that is.

Thanks.