Re: [Discussion] t1006: testing %(rest) with object names containing whitespace

From: jyotish kumar <jyotishkumar725015@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 26, 2026, 04:56 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGjZMyRF-hV8PMK2VBJT-9kzvgtQYP2EfYSMPjxSKmc2ZgscDw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqjyn5w2l2.fsf@gitster.g>

Hi Jeff and Junio,

Thanks for the clarification. I understand that the limitation is intentional and that using the resolved object ID would not test how %(rest) behaves with the original object name.

I'd be happy to volunteer to clean up the test in t/t1006-cat-file.sh, so that it handles this known limitation appropriately and removes the obsolete FIXME.

I'll work on the test change and send a patch for review.

Thanks, Jyotish

On Mon, Oct 26, 2026 at 9:11 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

>
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
> > So IMHO everything is working as designed, and there is nothing to fix
> > in the code. But using test_expect_failure seems weird to me. It avoids
> > the test suite announcing a failure, but it is not really a breakage to
> > be fixed. A test with %(rest) and an object name with space should
> > probably just be skipped. We _could_ run just those cases with the
> > resolved id, but the point of that test is checking how %(rest) works
> > with the name, so I don't know that it would be testing anything useful.
>
> Yup, thanks for finding old (but not so old) discussion.  We really
> should have fixed the test including the fixme comment as we knew
> already back then that there was nothing to fix.
>
> Perhaps somebody involved in this discussion thread can volunteer to
> do so this time?