[PATCH 3/3] t0000: drop "known breakage" test
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Dec 28, 2013, 09:33 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20131228093340.GC21109@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20131228092731.GA26337@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Having a simulated "known breakage" test means that the test suite will always tell us there is a bug to be fixed, even though it is only simulated.
The right way to test this is in a sub-test, that can also check that we provide the correct exit status and output. Fortunately, we already have such a test (added much later by 5ebf89e).
We could arguably get rid of the simulated success test immediately above, as well, as it is also redundant with the tests added in 5ebf89e. However, it does not have the annoying behavior of the "known breakage" test. It may also be easier to debug if the test suite is truly broken, since it is not a test-within-a-test, as the later tests are.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> --- I am not _that_ bothered by the "known breakage", but AFAICT there is zero benefit to keeping this redundant test. But maybe I am missing something.
t/t0000-basic.sh | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/t0000-basic.sh b/t/t0000-basic.sh index e6c5b63..a2bb63c 100755 --- a/t/t0000-basic.sh +++ b/t/t0000-basic.sh @@ -41,9 +41,6 @@ test_expect_success '.git/objects should have 3 subdirectories' ' test_expect_success 'success is reported like this' ' : ' -test_expect_failure 'pretend we have a known breakage' ' - false -' run_sub_test_lib_test () { name="$1" descr="$2" # stdin is the body of the test code
-- 1.8.5.1.399.g900e7cd