Re: [PATCH 3/4 v6] cache-tree: subdirectory tests
- From
David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com>
- Date
- Jul 11, 2014, 22:46 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1405118791.3775.26.camel@stross>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqq7g3j6gzr.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Fri, 2014-07-11 at 08:40 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 31 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > > >>> + sed -n -e "s/[0-9]* subtrees//" -e '/#(ref)/d' -e '/^invalid /p' >actual && > > > > Is the second one to remove "#(ref)", which appears for a good > > "reference" cache tree entry shown for comparison, necessary? Do > > they ever begin with "invalid"? If they ever begin with "invalid" > > that itself may even be a noteworthy breakage to catch, no? > > Answering to myself... > > Because test-dump-cache-tree uses DRY_RUN to create only an in-core > copy of tree object, and we notice that the reference cache-tree > created in the tests contains the object name of a tree that does > not yet exist in the object database. We get "invalid #(ref)" for > such node. > > In the ideal world, I think whoever tries to compare two cache-trees > (i.e. test-dump-cache-tree) should *not* care, because we are merely > trying to show what the correct tree object name for the node would > be, but this is only for testing, so the best way forward would be > to: > > - Stop using DRY_RUN in test-dump-cache-tree.c; > > - Stop the code to support DRY_RUN from cache-tree.c (nobody but > the test uses it); and > > - Drop the "-e '#(ref)/d'" from the above. > > I would think.
Do you mean that I should do this in this patch set, or that it's a good idea for the future?
Also, if we don't use DRY_RUN, won't test-dump-cache-tree add trees to the actual ODB, which would be odd for a test program?