Re: [PATCH 2/2] tests: make test_must_fail fail on missing commands
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 31, 2010, 18:14 UTC
- Message-ID
- <AANLkTimpaD7gW56sLqFzHOe+32QkXMOCkpQqJuaZNZav@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20100831180847.GC15020@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 18:08, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:26:57PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >> Jeff King wrote: >> >> > The point of it is to run a command that produces failure. A >> > missing command is more likely an error in the test script >> >> Makes sense. Here's the corresponding change for test_might_fail. > > I think this is probably worth doing. Unless somebody is doing something > silly like: > > test_might_fail command_that_might_exist > > But that seems a pretty contrived scenario (I am imagining something > like "call sync now, but if we don't have it, don't fail". But in the > test scripts that seems unlikely).
Yes, test_must_fail is only for git commands, not external stuff like sync, although some naughty people have gone and used it for grep/test in a few places instead of using "!" it seems.