On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 02:24:12PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 12:50:33PM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > > > +test_expect_failure 'traverse unexpected non-tree entry (seen)' ' > > > + test_must_fail git rev-list --objects $blob $broken_tree >output 2>&1 > > > > This test saves standard output and error, but doesn't look at them. > > I think we want to be checking for "not a tree" here, which is later > added with the fix. But either we should have the test_i18ngrep here > initially, or we should add both the redirect and the grep with the fix. > > > > +test_expect_success 'setup unexpected non-commit parent' ' > > > + git cat-file commit $commit | > > > + perl -lpe "/^author/ && print q(parent $blob)" \ > > > + >broken-commit && > > > > Don't run git commands upstream of a pipe, because the pipe hides > > their exit code. This applies to several other tests below as well. > > I disagree with that rule here. We're not testing "cat-file" in any > meaningful way, but just getting some stock output from a known-good > commit.
It makes auditing harder and sets bad example. > > Wouldn't a 'sed' one-liner suffice, so we won't have yet another perl > > dependency? > > Heh, this was actually the subject of much discussion before the patches > hit the list. If you can write such a one-liner that is both readable > and portable, please share it. I got disgusted with sed and suggested > this perl. Hm, so the trivial s/// with '\n' in the replacement part is not portable, then? Oh, well.
