# [PATCH] t1900: cover linked worktrees and separate git dirs 2 messages from 2026-03-18 to 2026-03-21. Participants: Jialong Wang, Tian Yuchen. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/65294 ## Jialong Wang, 2026-03-18 20:35 Subject: [PATCH] t1900: cover linked worktrees and separate git dirs Message-ID: <20260318203547.39972-1-jerrywang183@yahoo.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20260318203547.39972-1-jerrywang183%40yahoo.com In-Reply-To: <20260318203547.39972-1-jerrywang183.ref@yahoo.com> ``` Add repo-info coverage for repositories accessed through a linked\nworktree and through a worktree created with --separate-git-dir.\n\nThese layouts are already supported by the current implementation, but\nare not exercised by t1900-repo-info.sh yet. Cover both the lines and\nnul output formats for layout.bare and layout.shallow in these cases. Signed-off-by: Jialong Wang --- t/t1900-repo-info.sh | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t1900-repo-info.sh b/t/t1900-repo-info.sh index a9eb07abe8..f85ed232c2 100755 --- a/t/t1900-repo-info.sh +++ b/t/t1900-repo-info.sh @@ -69,6 +69,45 @@ test_repo_info 'object.format = sha1 is retrieved correctly' \ test_repo_info 'object.format = sha256 is retrieved correctly' \ 'git init --object-format=sha256' 'sha256' 'object.format' 'sha256' +test_expect_success 'setup linked worktree' ' + git init main && + git -C main worktree add ../linked +' + +test_expect_success 'linked worktree layout values are retrieved correctly in lines format' ' + cat >expect <<-\EOF && + layout.bare=false + layout.shallow=false + EOF + git -C linked repo info layout.bare layout.shallow >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + +test_expect_success 'linked worktree layout values are retrieved correctly in nul format' ' + printf "layout.bare\nfalse\0layout.shallow\nfalse\0" >expect && + git -C linked repo info --format=nul layout.bare layout.shallow >actual && + test_cmp_bin expect actual +' + +test_expect_success 'setup repository created with --separate-git-dir' ' + git init --separate-git-dir=separate.git separate-worktree +' + +test_expect_success 'separate-git-dir layout values are retrieved correctly in lines format' ' + cat >expect <<-\EOF && + layout.bare=false + layout.shallow=false + EOF + git -C separate-worktree repo info layout.bare layout.shallow >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + +test_expect_success 'separate-git-dir layout values are retrieved correctly in nul format' ' + printf "layout.bare\nfalse\0layout.shallow\nfalse\0" >expect && + git -C separate-worktree repo info --format=nul layout.bare layout.shallow >actual && + test_cmp_bin expect actual +' + test_expect_success 'values returned in order requested' ' cat >expect <<-\EOF && layout.bare=false -- 2.51.0 ``` ## Tian Yuchen, 2026-03-21 18:32 Subject: Re: [PATCH] t1900: cover linked worktrees and separate git dirs Message-ID: <0b4dee1e-5a85-4863-9538-8c3bbf8e9aef@malon.dev> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/0b4dee1e-5a85-4863-9538-8c3bbf8e9aef%40malon.dev In-Reply-To: <20260318203547.39972-1-jerrywang183@yahoo.com> ``` Hi Jialong, Thanks for the patch. On 3/19/26 04:35, Jialong Wang wrote: > Add repo-info coverage for repositories accessed through a linked\nworktree and through a worktree created with --separate-git-dir.\n\nThese layouts are already supported by the current implementation, but\nare not exercised by t1900-repo-info.sh yet. Cover both the lines and\nnul output formats for layout.bare and layout.shallow in these cases. > > Signed-off-by: Jialong Wang > --- I noticed that line breaks in the submitted data are escaped as \n characters. Even if you send the patch using a different tool, you should still check the mailing list to see how it looks, right? ;) > t/t1900-repo-info.sh | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/t/t1900-repo-info.sh b/t/t1900-repo-info.sh > index a9eb07abe8..f85ed232c2 100755 > --- a/t/t1900-repo-info.sh > +++ b/t/t1900-repo-info.sh > @@ -69,6 +69,45 @@ test_repo_info 'object.format = sha1 is retrieved correctly' \ > test_repo_info 'object.format = sha256 is retrieved correctly' \ > 'git init --object-format=sha256' 'sha256' 'object.format' 'sha256' > > +test_expect_success 'setup linked worktree' ' > + git init main && > + git -C main worktree add ../linked > +' > + > +test_expect_success 'linked worktree layout values are retrieved correctly in lines format' ' > + cat >expect <<-\EOF && > + layout.bare=false > + layout.shallow=false > + EOF > + git -C linked repo info layout.bare layout.shallow >actual && > + test_cmp expect actual > +' > + > +test_expect_success 'linked worktree layout values are retrieved correctly in nul format' ' > + printf "layout.bare\nfalse\0layout.shallow\nfalse\0" >expect && > + git -C linked repo info --format=nul layout.bare layout.shallow >actual && > + test_cmp_bin expect actual > +' > + > +test_expect_success 'setup repository created with --separate-git-dir' ' > + git init --separate-git-dir=separate.git separate-worktree > +' > + > +test_expect_success 'separate-git-dir layout values are retrieved correctly in lines format' ' > + cat >expect <<-\EOF && > + layout.bare=false > + layout.shallow=false > + EOF > + git -C separate-worktree repo info layout.bare layout.shallow >actual && > + test_cmp expect actual > +' > + > +test_expect_success 'separate-git-dir layout values are retrieved correctly in nul format' ' > + printf "layout.bare\nfalse\0layout.shallow\nfalse\0" >expect && > + git -C separate-worktree repo info --format=nul layout.bare layout.shallow >actual && > + test_cmp_bin expect actual > +' > + > test_expect_success 'values returned in order requested' ' > cat >expect <<-\EOF && > layout.bare=false The patch itself looks fine. The 'git repo info' command seems to be a relatively new one, so I think adding a test script is necessary... ...except one thing to mention: > +test_expect_success 'setup linked worktree' ' > + git init main && > + git -C main worktree add ../linked Since the main repo here is an empty, can a linked worktree be created? Here, HEAD does not point to a valid object, and there is no commit available checkout. I think it would be better to create a commit using test_commit first. Regards, Yuchen ```