Re: [PATCH] tests: mark two failing tests under FAIL_PREREQS

From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 21, 2019, 18:26 UTC
Message-ID: <87a7ea94m9.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1906212000580.44@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

On Fri, Jun 21 2019, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 24 quoted lines

> Hi Ævar,
>
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2019, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
>> Fix a couple of tests that would potentially fail under
>> GIT_TEST_FAIL_PREREQS=true.
>>
>> I missed these when annotating other tests in dfe1a17df9 ("tests: add
>> a special setup where prerequisites fail", 2019-05-13) because on my
>> system I can only reproduce this failure when I run the tests as
>> "root", since the tests happen to depend on whether we can fall back
>> on GECOS info or not. I.e. they'd usually fail to look up the ident
>> info anyway, but not always.
>
> I had to read the commit message (in particular the oneline) a couple of
> times, and I have to admit that I wish it was a bit clearer...
>
> From the explanation, I would have assumed that those two test cases fail
> often, anyway, so they shouldn't care whether `FAIL_PREREQS` is in effect.
>
> The only reason why they should be exempt from the `FAIL_PREREQS` mode
> that I can think of is that later test cases would depend on them, but how
> can they? Those test cases would also have to have the `AUTOIDENT` prereq,
> and they would be skipped under `FAIL_PREREQS`, too, no?

The test doesn't depend on "AUTOIDENT", but "!AUTOIDENT", i.e. the negated version. The effect of the FAIL_PREREQS mode is to set all prereqs to false, and therefore "test_have_prereq AUTOIDENT" is false, but "test_have_prereq !AUTOIDENT" is true.

So this test that would otherwise get skipped gets run.

I honestly didn't think much about these cases when I wrote dfe1a17df9 ("tests: add a special setup where prerequisites fail", 2019-05-13), and now I'm not quite sure whether it should be considered a bug or a feature, but in the meantime this un-breaks the test suite under this mode.

Show 44 quoted lines

> In other words, I struggle to understand why this patch is necessary.
>
> Could you help me understand?
>
> Ciao,
> Dscho
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  t/t0007-git-var.sh          | 2 +-
>>  t/t7502-commit-porcelain.sh | 2 +-
>>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/t/t0007-git-var.sh b/t/t0007-git-var.sh
>> index 5868a87352..1f600e2cae 100755
>> --- a/t/t0007-git-var.sh
>> +++ b/t/t0007-git-var.sh
>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ test_expect_success 'get GIT_COMMITTER_IDENT' '
>>  	test_cmp expect actual
>>  '
>>
>> -test_expect_success !AUTOIDENT 'requested identites are strict' '
>> +test_expect_success !FAIL_PREREQS,!AUTOIDENT 'requested identites are strict' '
>>  	(
>>  		sane_unset GIT_COMMITTER_NAME &&
>>  		sane_unset GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL &&
>> diff --git a/t/t7502-commit-porcelain.sh b/t/t7502-commit-porcelain.sh
>> index 5733d9cd34..14c92e4c25 100755
>> --- a/t/t7502-commit-porcelain.sh
>> +++ b/t/t7502-commit-porcelain.sh
>> @@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ echo editor started >"$(pwd)/.git/result"
>>  exit 0
>>  EOF
>>
>> -test_expect_success !AUTOIDENT 'do not fire editor when committer is bogus' '
>> +test_expect_success !FAIL_PREREQS,!AUTOIDENT 'do not fire editor when committer is bogus' '
>>  	>.git/result &&
>>
>>  	echo >>negative &&
>> --
>> 2.22.0.455.g172b71a6c5
>>
>>