Re: [PATCH 4/5] t6022, t6046: test expected behavior instead of testing a proxy for it

>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 12:14:23AM +0000, Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > diff --git a/t/t6022-merge-rename.sh b/t/t6022-merge-rename.sh
> > index 6f196aaf276..d97cf48495b 100755
> > --- a/t/t6022-merge-rename.sh
> > +++ b/t/t6022-merge-rename.sh
> > @@ -242,12 +242,23 @@ test_expect_success 'merge of identical changes in a renamed file' '
> >       rm -f A M N &&
> >       git reset --hard &&
> >       git checkout change+rename &&
> > +
> > +     test-tool chmtime =31337 B &&
> > +     test-tool chmtime --get B >old-mtime &&
>
> Here you compare the mtime of 'B' before ...
>
> >       GIT_MERGE_VERBOSITY=3 git merge change >out &&
> > -     test_i18ngrep "^Skipped B" out &&
> > +
> > +     test-tool chmtime --get B >new-mtime &&
> > +     test_cmp old-mtime new-mtime &&
>
> ... and after the merge.
>
> > +
> >       git reset --hard HEAD^ &&
> >       git checkout change &&
> > +
> > +     test-tool chmtime =-1 M &&
> > +     test-tool chmtime --get M >old-mtime &&
>
> Here, however, you compare the mtime of 'M' before the merge ...
>
> >       GIT_MERGE_VERBOSITY=3 git merge change+rename >out &&
> > -     test_i18ngrep ! "^Skipped B" out
> > +
> > +     test-tool chmtime --get B >new-mtime &&
> > +     test $(cat old-mtime) -lt $(cat new-mtime)
>
> ... with the mtime of 'B' after the merge, i.e. the mtimes of two
> different files.
>
> Is that right?