On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 05:18:04PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > --- a/t/t3600-rm.sh > > +++ b/t/t3600-rm.sh > > @@ -240,18 +240,15 @@ test_expect_success 'refresh index before checking if > > it is up-to-date' ' > > > > test_expect_success 'choking "git rm" should not let it die with cruft' ' > > git reset -q --hard && > > + test_when_finished "rm -f .git/index.lock ; git reset -q --hard" && > > I'd use "&&" here --- the test_cleanup checks the exit status from > this scriptlet, so it's a good habit.
OK. My motivation for the ';' was that we should make sure that both steps of the cleanup are executed. However, now thinking about it if regular 'rm -f' can't remove the lock file then all bets are off anyway. > [...] > > - test -f .git/index.lock > > - status=$? > > - rm -f .git/index.lock > > - git reset -q --hard > > - test "$status" != 0 > > + test ! -f .git/index.lock > > Gah. Thanks for cleaning it up. > > Maybe test_path_is_missing would make sense here? (It would notice a > .git/index.lock directory, which is not very likely :), but more > importantly, it says why it is failing the test when it fails.) I was not aware of the test_path_is_missing helper. I don't think it matters whether it's a file or a directory, because a stale .git/index.lock directory would be just as bad. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
