Hi,
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:42:10AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> -- >8 --
> Subject: status test: add missing && to <<EOF blocks
>
> When a test forgets to include && after each command, it is possible
> for an early command to succeed but the test to fail, which can hide
> bugs.
Surely you meant "succeed" and "fail" the other way around :)
> Checked using the following patch to the test harness:
>
> --- a/t/test-lib.sh
> +++ b/t/test-lib.sh
> @@ -425,7 +425,17 @@ test_eval_ () {
> eval </dev/null >&3 2>&4 "$*"
> }
>
> +check_command_chaining_ () {
> + eval >&3 2>&4 "(exit 189) && $*"
> + eval_chain_ret=$?
> + if test "$eval_chain_ret" != 189
> + then
> + error 'bug in test script: missing "&&" in test
> commands'
> + fi
> +}
> +
> test_run_ () {
> + check_command_chaining_ "$1"
> test_cleanup=:
> expecting_failure=$2
> setup_malloc_check
Clever.
If I do a
- error 'bug in test script: missing "&&" in test commands'
+ say_color error 'error: bug in test script: missing "&&" in
test commands'
to avoid erroring out and skipping the rest of the test script on the
first broken command chain, then we can see that we have a lot of
broken command chains in the test suite:
$ for t in t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]*.sh ; do ./$t ; done |grep -c
'^error:.*missing "&&" in test commands$'
345
After a cursory look most of them seem to be the simple "missing &&"
type, but there are some funny ones, too.
Gábor
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
