Re: [Outreachy][PATCH v6] t6050: avoid pipes with upstream Git commands

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Oct 14, 2024, 21:57 UTC
Message-ID: <Zw2T3PmdbgRGrIdF@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <20241014152411.11052-1-chizobajames21@gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 04:24:11PM +0100, chizobajames21@gmail.com wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

>  test_expect_success 'test GIT_NO_REPLACE_OBJECTS env variable' '
> -	GIT_NO_REPLACE_OBJECTS=1 git cat-file commit $HASH2 | grep "author A U Thor" &&
> -	GIT_NO_REPLACE_OBJECTS=1 git show $HASH2 | grep "A U Thor"
> +	GIT_NO_REPLACE_OBJECTS=1 git cat-file commit $HASH2 >actual &&
> +	test_grep "author A U Thor"  actual &&

Nit: it looks like there is an extra space between the closing '"' quote
character and the filename 'actual'.

Show 10 quoted lines

> @@ -284,8 +313,8 @@ test_expect_success 'bisect and replacements' '
>  '
>
>  test_expect_success 'index-pack and replacements' '
> -	git --no-replace-objects rev-list --objects HEAD |
> -	git --no-replace-objects pack-objects test- &&
> +	git --no-replace-objects rev-list --objects HEAD >actual &&
> +	git --no-replace-objects pack-objects test- <actual &&
>  	git index-pack test-*.pack
>  '

Hmm. In other instances, actual seems like an OK name choice, but here I wonder if 'in' would be more appropriate, since we're feeding it as input to another Git command.

Other than those couple of comments, these all look pretty reasonable to me.

Thanks, Taylor