From: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 21:12:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] t/README: test_must_fail is for testing Git
Message-ID: <82E212D3F25A4ABA923D1D81684F6578@PhilipOakley>
In-Reply-To: <7v1u8h7gac.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 9:49 PM
> "Philip Oakley" <philipoakley@iee.org> writes:
>
>> From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 5:50 PM
>>> When a test wants to make sure there is no <string> in an output
>>> file, we should just say "! grep string output";
>>
>> Small nit: It took me two readings of the commit message to correctly
>> parse this break point. The flowing together of the two parts with 
>> the
>> semicolon fooled me. Separate them?
>>
>>>      "test_must_fail"
>>> is there only to test Git command and catch unusual deaths we know
>>> about (e.g. segv) as an error, not as an expected failure.
>
> Thanks.  Does this read better?

Yes.  Thanks.

>
>    t/README: test_must_fail is for testing Git
>
>    When a test wants to make sure there is no <string> in an output
>    file, we should just say "! grep string output".
>
>    "test_must_fail" is there only to test Git command and catch 
> unusual
>    deaths we know about (e.g. segv) as an error, not as an expected
>    failure.  "test_must_fail grep string output" is unnecessary, as
>    we are not making sure the system binaries do not dump core or
>    anything like that.
>
>    Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> --

Philip