From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 23:56:23 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 5/9] remote set-head: better output for --auto Message-ID: In-Reply-To: "Bence Ferdinandy" writes: > 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?