From: Lessley Dennington Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 15:10:33 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] test-read-cache: set up repo after git directory Message-ID: <0372ee0b-8dda-c505-2b83-30da74e4fb36@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On 11/23/21 3:42 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Lessley Dennington via GitGitGadget" > writes: > >> From: Lessley Dennington >> >> Move repo setup to occur after git directory is set up. This will ensure >> enabling the sparse index for `diff` (and guarding against the nongit >> scenario) will not cause tests to start failing, since that change will include >> adding a check to prepare_repo_settings() with the new BUG. > > This looks obviously the right thing to do. Would anything break > because of the "wrong" ordering of events in the original code? > > IOW, can this "bugfix" be protected with a new test against > regression? > Yep! Tests 2, 3, 28, and 34 in t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh will fail without this change. >> Signed-off-by: Lessley Dennington >> --- >> t/helper/test-read-cache.c | 5 +++-- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/t/helper/test-read-cache.c b/t/helper/test-read-cache.c >> index b52c174acc7..0d9f08931a1 100644 >> --- a/t/helper/test-read-cache.c >> +++ b/t/helper/test-read-cache.c >> @@ -39,8 +39,6 @@ int cmd__read_cache(int argc, const char **argv) >> int table = 0, expand = 0; >> >> initialize_the_repository(); >> - prepare_repo_settings(r); >> - r->settings.command_requires_full_index = 0; >> >> for (++argv, --argc; *argv && starts_with(*argv, "--"); ++argv, --argc) { >> if (skip_prefix(*argv, "--print-and-refresh=", &name)) >> @@ -56,6 +54,9 @@ int cmd__read_cache(int argc, const char **argv) >> setup_git_directory(); >> git_config(git_default_config, NULL); >> >> + prepare_repo_settings(r); >> + r->settings.command_requires_full_index = 0; >> + >> for (i = 0; i < cnt; i++) { >> repo_read_index(r);