From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 02:57:52 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/10] tests for various pack index features
Message-ID: <7vr6qrr51r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.98.0704101607390.28181@xanadu.home>

Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:

> This is a fairly complete list of tests for various aspects of pack 
> index versions 1 and  2.
>
> Tests on index v2 include 32-bit and 64-bit offsets, as well as a nice 
> demonstration of the flawed repacking integrity checks that index 
> version 2 intend to solve over index version 1 with the per object CRC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
> ---
>
> OK this should really be the last patch for this topic.
>
> diff --git a/t/t5302-pack-index.sh b/t/t5302-pack-index.sh
> new file mode 100755
> index 0000000..3371964
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/t/t5302-pack-index.sh
> @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
> +#!/bin/sh
> +#
> +# Copyright (c) 2007 Nicolas Pitre
> +#
> +
> +test_description='pack index with 64-bit offsets and object CRC'
> +. ./test-lib.sh
> +
> +test_expect_success \
> +    'setup' \
> +    'rm -rf .git
> +     git-init &&
> +     for i in `seq -w 100`
> +     do
> +         echo $i >file_$i &&
> +         dd if=/dev/urandom bs=8k count=1 >>file_$i &&
> +         git-update-index --add file_$i || return 1
> +     done &&

Is there a way for our tests to be a bit more stable than
urandom?  I saw on the first run fsck was OOM-killed, but the
second and subsequent run did not.  It's a bit hard to diagnose.