On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ronnie Sahlberg wrote: > >> This means that most loose refs will no longer be present after the rename > > Is this to handle the "git branch -m foo/bar foo" case or for some other > purpose?
Yes. That is the main reason. > > [...] >> --- a/t/t3200-branch.sh >> +++ b/t/t3200-branch.sh >> @@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ test_expect_success 'renaming a symref is not allowed' ' >> git symbolic-ref refs/heads/master2 refs/heads/master && >> test_must_fail git branch -m master2 master3 && >> git symbolic-ref refs/heads/master2 && >> - test_path_is_file .git/refs/heads/master && >> + test_path_is_missing .git/refs/heads/master && >> test_path_is_missing .git/refs/heads/master3 > > It's kind of silly that this test is mucking about in the .git directory > at all. Shouldn't the check be something like > > git rev-parse --verify refs/heads/master && > test_must_fail git symbolic-ref refs/heads/master3 && > test_must_fail git rev-parse refs/heads/master3 > > ? Thanks. I updated the test with your change. There is a whole bunch of tests that are like and access files directly.. Testing if a path exists or not, or checking that a reflog file contains x number of lines. etc. All these tests will be updated to not access the files directly once I start mucking around with a TDB based refs backend. -- 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
