Re: [PATCH v13 5/9] remote set-head: better output for --auto

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 20, 2024, 23:56 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqmshth32w.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <D5R0ONTYT1EG.K1XD9FZQO6R6@ferdinandy.com>

"Bence Ferdinandy" <bence@ferdinandy.com> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Since this particular test just wants to test what happens if
> `refs_update_symref_extended` returns with 1 and not testing correct behaviour
> of backends and such, would it be acceptable if this particular test case would
> check for the backend and if it is reftables it will just pass without actually
> checking and do the manually locking thing above for the files backend?

I think we have some pre-made test prerequisite to skip tests unless run with a particular ref backend, exactly for that. Perhaps

    test_expect_success REFFILES 'block update to check error' '
	... manually block update and see how the operation
	... errors out
    '

or something?