From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2021 01:46:29 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] t5326: test propagating hashcache values
Message-ID: <87zgsnj0q0.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <acf3ec60cb6f151a9f121d242f38fef6711cced4.1631049462.git.me@ttaylorr.com>


On Tue, Sep 07 2021, Taylor Blau wrote:

> Now that we both can propagate values from the hashcache, and respect
> the configuration to enable the hashcache at all, test that both of
> these function correctly by hardening their behavior with a test.
>
> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
> ---
>  t/t5326-multi-pack-bitmaps.sh | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/t/t5326-multi-pack-bitmaps.sh b/t/t5326-multi-pack-bitmaps.sh
> index 4ad7c2c969..24148ca35b 100755
> --- a/t/t5326-multi-pack-bitmaps.sh
> +++ b/t/t5326-multi-pack-bitmaps.sh
> @@ -283,4 +283,36 @@ test_expect_success 'pack.preferBitmapTips' '
>  	)
>  '
>  
> +test_expect_success 'hash-cache values are propagated from pack bitmaps' '
> +	rm -fr repo &&
> +	git init repo &&
> +	test_when_finished "rm -fr repo" &&

It seems the need for this "rm -fr repo" dance instead of just relying
on test_when_finished "rm -rf repo" is because of a 3x tests in a
function in tb/multi-pack-bitmaps that should probably be combined into
one, i.e. they share the same logical "repo" setup.

> +	(
> +		cd repo &&
> +
> +		git config pack.writeBitmapHashCache true &&

s/git config/test_config/, surely.