Re: [PATCH] fetch-pack: test explicitly that --all can fetch tag references pointing to non-commits
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Jun 13, 2018, 23:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20180613231147.GA21025@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20180613210509.GA15574@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 05:05:09PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
Show 29 quoted lines
> > In order to be sure fetching funky tags will never break, let's
> > explicitly test all relevant cases with 4 tag objects pointing to 1) a
> > blob, 2) a tree, 3) a commit, and 4) another tag objects. The referenced
> > tag objects themselves are referenced from under regular refs/tags/*
> > namespace. Before e9502c0a7f `fetch-pack --all` was failing e.g. this way:
> >
> > .../git/t/trash directory.t5500-fetch-pack/fetchall$ git ls-remote ..
> > 44085874... HEAD
> > ...
> > bc4e9e1f... refs/tags/tag-to-blob
> > 038f48ad... refs/tags/tag-to-blob^{} # peeled
> > 520db1f5... refs/tags/tag-to-tree
> > 7395c100... refs/tags/tag-to-tree^{} # peeled
> >
> > .../git/t/trash directory.t5500-fetch-pack/fetchall$ git fetch-pack --all ..
> > fatal: A git upload-pack: not our ref 038f48ad...
> > fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly
>
> TBH, I do not find this snippet all that compelling. We know that
> e9502c0a7f already fixed the bug, and that it had nothing to do with
> non-commits at all.
>
> The primary reason to add these tests is that in general we do not cover
> fetch-pack over tags to non-commits. And I think the reason to use
> otherwise unreferenced objects is that it they are more likely to have
> detectable symptoms if they tickle a bug.
>
> So why don't we say that, instead of re-hashing output from the earlier
> fix?Hmm, it looks like this already hit 'next', so it is too late to change the commit message (although 'next' will get rewound after the release, so we _could_ do it then).
I also was going to suggest these style fixes, which could be applied on top (or squashed if we end up going that route). I actually wonder if the final tag one could just use two invocations of "git tag -m", but it's probably not worth spending too much time on polishing.
-- >8 -- Subject: [PATCH] t5500: prettify non-commit tag tests
We don't need to use backslash continuation, as the "&&" already provides continuation (and happily soaks up empty lines between commands).
We can also expand the multi-line printf into a here-document, which lets us use line breaks more naturally (and avoids another continuation that required us to break the natural indentation).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> --- t/t5500-fetch-pack.sh | 19 +++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/t5500-fetch-pack.sh b/t/t5500-fetch-pack.sh index ea6570e819..3d33ab3875 100755 --- a/t/t5500-fetch-pack.sh +++ b/t/t5500-fetch-pack.sh @@ -533,19 +533,26 @@ test_expect_success 'test --all wrt tag to non-commits' ' # are reachable only via created tag references. blob=$(echo "hello blob" | git hash-object -t blob -w --stdin) && git tag -a -m "tag -> blob" tag-to-blob $blob && - \ + tree=$(printf "100644 blob $blob\tfile" | git mktree) && git tag -a -m "tag -> tree" tag-to-tree $tree && - \ + tree2=$(printf "100644 blob $blob\tfile2" | git mktree) && commit=$(git commit-tree -m "hello commit" $tree) && git tag -a -m "tag -> commit" tag-to-commit $commit && - \ + blob2=$(echo "hello blob2" | git hash-object -t blob -w --stdin) && - tag=$(printf "object $blob2\ntype blob\ntag tag-to-blob2\n\ -tagger author A U Thor <author@example.com> 0 +0000\n\nhello tag" | git mktag) && + tag=$(git mktag <<-EOF + object $blob2 + type blob + tag tag-to-blob2 + tagger author A U Thor <author@example.com> 0 +0000 + + hello tag + EOF + ) && git tag -a -m "tag -> tag" tag-to-tag $tag && - \ + # `fetch-pack --all` should succeed fetching all those objects. mkdir fetchall && (
-- 2.18.0.rc2.519.gb87ed92113