Re: [PATCH try 2] t1301-shared-repo.sh: don't let a default ACL interfere with the test

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 14, 2008, 22:32 UTC
Message-ID: <7vzll66c5u.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1224022216.2699.5.camel@mattlaptop2.local>

Matt McCutchen <matt@mattmccutchen.net> writes:

> This test creates files with several different umasks and expects the files to
> be permissioned according to the umasks, so a default ACL on the test dir causes

Is "to permission" a verb?

> the test to fail.  To avoid that, remove the default ACL if possible with
> setfacl(1).  (Will work on many systems.)

It is not clear in the comment in parentheses what provision you have made not to harm people on systems without setfacl.

I think "if possible" which you already have is a good enough description (i.e. "if setfacl fails we do not barf and if you do not have the command you probably are not running with a funky default ACL to see this issue anyway"), so I'd rather drop the comment in parentheses.

Show 18 quoted lines

> Signed-off-by: Matt McCutchen <matt@mattmccutchen.net>
> ---
> This time with a signoff.
>
>  t/t1301-shared-repo.sh |    3 +++
>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/t1301-shared-repo.sh b/t/t1301-shared-repo.sh
> index dc85e8b..2275caa 100755
> --- a/t/t1301-shared-repo.sh
> +++ b/t/t1301-shared-repo.sh
> @@ -7,6 +7,9 @@ test_description='Test shared repository initialization'
>  
>  . ./test-lib.sh
>  
> +# Remove a default ACL from the test dir if possible.
> +setfacl -k . 2>/dev/null
> +

Makes me wonder why this is _not_ inside test-lib.sh where it creates the test (trash) directory. That way, you would cover future tests that wants to see a saner/simpler POSIX permission behaviour, wouldn't you?