From: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 10:39:28 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v0 2/3] t/t3400-rebase.sh: add more tests to help migrating git-rebase.sh to C Message-ID: In-Reply-To: 2009/5/21 Jakub Narebski : > Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy     writes: > >> These new tests make sure I don't miss any check being performed before >> rebase is proceeded (which is well tested by other tests) >> >> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy >> --- >>  t/t3400-rebase.sh |   28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>  1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/t/t3400-rebase.sh b/t/t3400-rebase.sh >> index 6e391a3..37f86ab 100755 >> --- a/t/t3400-rebase.sh >> +++ b/t/t3400-rebase.sh >> @@ -41,9 +41,37 @@ test_expect_success \ >>       git tag topic >>  ' >> >> +test_expect_success 'rebase on dirty worktree' ' >> +     echo dirty >> A && >> +     ! git rebase master' > > Shouldn't you use test_must_fail instead? From t/test-lib.sh > (paraphrasing): > >  Writing this as "! git rebase master" is wrong, because >  the failure could be due to a segv.  We want a controlled failure. Right. Shouldn't we have another patch to fix this once and for all? I did "grep -F '! git'" and find a few places applicable too. >> + >>  test_expect_success \ >>      'the rebase operation should not have destroyed author information' \ >>      '! (git log | grep "Author:" | grep "<>")' > > Errrr... what?  Why git-log and not git-cat-file?  Why grep twice? > Additionally you do not check here that author is unchanged, only that > is not destroyed. Errr.. this is not from me. No idea why. -- Duy