Re: [PATCH v2] tests: lint for run-away here-doc

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 23, 2017, 05:43 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqshm4fszt.fsf_-_@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq7f3ghhc7.fsf_-_@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

We found a few run-away here documents that are started with an end-of-here-doc marker that is incorrectly spelled, e.g.

	git some command >actual &&
	cat <<EOF >expect
	...
	EOF &&
	test_cmp expect actual

which ends up slurping the entire remainder of the script as if it were the data. Often the command that gets misused like this exits without failure (e.g. "cat" in the above example), which makes the command appear to work, without eve executing the remainder of the test.

Piggy-back on the test that catches &&-chain breakage to detect this case as well.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
---

 * The previous one was simply buggy; I forgot that there was an
   interesting redirection going on inside test_eval_.  Sorry for
   the noise.

   Also we could do this in the same test_eval_ without adding
   another one, which is how this version does it.

 t/test-lib.sh | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
index 86d77c16dd..d5f2b70bce 100644
--- a/t/test-lib.sh
+++ b/t/test-lib.sh
@@ -624,9 +624,9 @@ test_run_ () {
 		trace=
 		# 117 is magic because it is unlikely to match the exit
 		# code of other programs
-		test_eval_ "(exit 117) && $1"
-		if test "$?" != 117; then
-			error "bug in the test script: broken &&-chain: $1"
+		if test "OK-117" != "$(test_eval_ "(exit 117) && $1${LF}${LF}echo OK-\$?" 3>&1)"
+		then
+			error "bug in the test script: broken &&-chain or run-away HERE-DOC: $1"
 		fi
 		trace=$trace_tmp
 	fi