Re: [PATCH] Avoid difference in tr semantics between System V and BSD
- From
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 28, 2013, 18:27 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20131028182718.GA4242@google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <526EA7C8.2020607@kdbg.org>
Johannes Sixt wrote:
> In other tests, we check for prerequisite PERL, i.e., we are prepared > that perl is not available. Shouldn't we do that here, too?
I think the tests assume there's a perl present even when the PERL prereq isn't present already. E.g.:
nul_to_q () {
"$PERL_PATH" -pe 'y/\000/Q/'
}So in practice the PERL prereq just means "NO_PERL wasn't set", or in other words, "commands that use perl work". Maybe something like the following would help?
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
diff --git i/t/README w/t/README index 2167125..54cd064 100644 --- i/t/README +++ w/t/README @@ -629,11 +629,20 @@ See the prereq argument to the test_* functions in the "Test harness library" section above and the "test_have_prereq" function for how to use these, and "test_set_prereq" for how to define your own. - - PERL & PYTHON + - PYTHON - Git wasn't compiled with NO_PERL=YesPlease or - NO_PYTHON=YesPlease. Wrap any tests that need Perl or Python in - these. + Git wasn't compiled with NO_PYTHON=YesPlease. Wrap any tests that + need Python with this. + + - PERL + + Git wasn't compiled with NO_PERL=YesPlease. + + Even without the PERL prerequisite, tests can assume there is a + usable perl interpreter at $PERL_PATH, though it need not be + particularly modern. + + Wrap tests for commands implemented in Perl with this. - POSIXPERM