Re: Do test-path_is_{file,dir,exists} make sense anymore with -x?
- From
SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 26, 2019, 17:04 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20190226170400.GC19739@szeder.dev>
- In-Reply-To
- <87sgwav8cp.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 05:10:30PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> However. I wonder in general if we've re-visited the utility of these > wrappers and maybe other similar wrappers after -x was added.
> But 4 years after this was added in a136f6d8ff ("test-lib.sh: support -x
> option for shell-tracing", 2014-10-10) we got -x, and then with "-i -v -x":'-x' tracing doesn't work in all test scripts, unless it is run with a Bash version already supporting BASH_XTRACEFD, i.e. v4.1 or later. Notably the default Bash shipped in macOS is somewhere around v3.2.
Show 20 quoted lines
> And at least to me whenever I have a test failure the first thing I do > is try with -x (if I wasn't already using it). Under that the wrapper > output is more verbose and no more helpful. It's immediately clear > what's going on with: > > + test -f doesnotexist > error: last command exited with $?=1 > > Whereas: > > + test -f doesnotexist > + echo File doesnotexist doesn't exist. > File doesnotexist doesn't exist. > + false > error: last command exited with $?=1 > > Gives me the same thing, but I have to read 5 lines instead of 2 that > ultimately don't tell me any more (and a bit of "huh, 'false' returned > 1? Of course! Oh! It's faking things up and it's the 'echo' that > matters...").
I didn't find this to be an issue, but because of functions like 'test_seq' and 'test_must_fail' I've thought about suppressing '-x' output for test helpers (haven't actually done anything about it, though).
Show 14 quoted lines
> Looking over test-lib-functions.sh this patch would do it. I couldn't
> spot any other functions redundant to -x:
>
> diff --git a/t/test-lib-functions.sh b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> index 80402a428f..b3a95b4968 100644
> --- a/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> +++ b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> @@ -555,33 +555,6 @@ test_external_without_stderr () {
> fi
> }
>
> -# debugging-friendly alternatives to "test [-f|-d|-e]"
> -# The commands test the existence or non-existence of $1. $2 can be
> -# given to provide a more precise diagnosis.Note the second parameter; though, of course, you could argue that we use it so rarely that it wouldn't really be missed.
Show 36 quoted lines
> -test_path_is_file () {
> - if ! test -f "$1"
> - then
> - echo "File $1 doesn't exist. $2"
> - false
> - fi
> -}
> -
> -test_path_is_dir () {
> - if ! test -d "$1"
> - then
> - echo "Directory $1 doesn't exist. $2"
> - false
> - fi
> -}
> -
> -test_path_exists () {
> - if ! test -e "$1"
> - then
> - echo "Path $1 doesn't exist. $2"
> - false
> - fi
> -}
> -
> # Check if the directory exists and is empty as expected, barf otherwise.
> test_dir_is_empty () {
> test_path_is_dir "$1" &&
> @@ -593,19 +566,6 @@ test_dir_is_empty () {
> fi
> }
>
> -test_path_is_missing () {
> - if test -e "$1"
> - then
> - echo "Path exists:"
> - ls -ld "$1"This 'ls' command gives a bit of additional info.
Show 18 quoted lines
> - if test $# -ge 1
> - then
> - echo "$*"
> - fi
> - false
> - fi
> -}
> -
> # test_line_count checks that a file has the number of lines it
> # ought to. For example:
> #
> @@ -849,6 +809,9 @@ verbose () {
> # otherwise.
>
> test_must_be_empty () {
> + # We don't want to remove this as noted in ec10b018e7 ("tests:
> + # use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of '! test -s'",
> + # 2018-08-19)Indeed.
> test_path_is_file "$1" &&
This still uses 'test_path_is_file'.
> if test -s "$1" > then