Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] Smart-http tests: Break test t5560-http-backend into pieces

From: Tarmigan <tarmigan+git@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 2, 2010, 20:44 UTC
Message-ID: <905315641001021244o522ac092g7fdaaab83a2609e2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7viqbmo173.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> Tarmigan <tarmigan+git@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> One reason it's labeled RFC is that I'm not very confident in my
>> ability to write portable shell script.  It works for me with bash,
>> but I'm not completely confident that is would work on ksh or dash.
>> So it would be nice if you could specifically take a look at the new
>> POST() and GET() and see if you notice anything obviously wrong there.
>
> Looked Ok to me from a cursory reading, even though I wonder what the
> first argument to run_backend function is good for...

Thanks for looking. I used the run_backend that was introduced in 34b6cb8bb, but looking more closely, it seems that the "http-backend blocks bad PATH_INFO" test wasn't actually checking anything. It seems the path_info function was intended to be used, but never actually was. I'm embarrassed to say that I was so focused on "no changes to existing tests" that I wasn't thinking about the bigger picture.

I have made a patch to address this, and have made it the first in the series. I would like to have Shawn's ack on at least that first patch, as I was trying to guess at his original intention with that test.

Thanks, Tarmigan