Tanay Abhra <tanay...@gmail.com> writes: > +test_expect_success 'check line errors for malformed values' ' > + mv .git/config .git/config.old && > + test_when_finished "mv .git/config.old .git/config" && > + cat >.git/config <<-\EOF && > + [alias] > + br > + EOF > + test_expect_code 128 git br 2>result && > + grep "fatal: bad config file line 2 in .git/config" result > +'
This is PATCH 4, and it tests a bug fixed in PATCH 1. It would have eased review to group both patches, either PATCH 1: introduce test_expect_failure test to demonstrate the failure PATCH 2: fix the bug and change test_expect_failure to test_expect_success Or putting both in the same patch. I think the series is OK like this, my comment is just to be read as "next time, here's how to do better". -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/ -- 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
