Re: tr/pty-all (Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2011, #04; Tue, 13))

[Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>]

Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Will merge to 'next' after taking another look.
> 
> The middle commit looks good.  The bottom commit could be improved as
> discussed at [1], but I guess that can happen in-tree.
> 
> However, the top commit ("test test-terminal's sanity") still does not
> seem right to me.

I wasn't under the impression that we were done with this, either :-)

> It makes the same test run three times.  Probably I should send an
> alternate patch to get that sanity-check to run once, but I am also
> not convinced the sanity-check is needed at all --- wouldn't any test
> that is relying on output from test_terminal act as a sanity check for
> it already?

It didn't.  Or more precisely, Michael Haggerty ran into the behavior
of

  git rev-parse ... | while read sha; do git checkout $sha; make test; done

couldn't make any sense of it, and reported it on IRC.  So in some
sense, it took infrequent circumstances and two developers' time; next
time around I'd prefer it to be detected automatically.

> As an aside, I also still believe that running "git shortlog" without
> explicitly passing "HEAD" when testing how it reacts to [core] pager
> configuration was a bug and a distraction, hence the patch at [2].

Why not.  Some other test should verify how shortlog reacts to the
tty-ness of stdin, but that's yet another direction.

> I also find Jeff's patch [3] appealing.

Me too, though wonder whether feeding a file full of garbage wouldn't
be better, so as to trip up commands that try to read only from a
non-tty stdin.



> [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/186923/focus=186944
> [2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/186932
> [3] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/186936

-- 
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch