[PATCH] Test for correct behaviour on %B(1) and %B(-1)

[PATCH] Test for correct behaviour on %B(1) and %B(-1)

[Johannes Gilger]

Small test for correct indentation of the new %B tag (and whether
negative values are ignored as an incorrect placeholder).

Signed-off-by: Johannes Gilger <heipei@hackvalue.de>
---
Hi Junio,

seeing as the %B-patch is in your pu you seem to be almost happy with it. It's 
marked NEEDSWORK: tests, so I thought I give that a try too. Probably best to 
be squashed with the other one.

Greetings,
Jojo

 t/t4202-log.sh |   20 ++++++++++++++------
 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/t/t4202-log.sh b/t/t4202-log.sh
index 1e952ca..9b7825d 100755
--- a/t/t4202-log.sh
+++ b/t/t4202-log.sh
@@ -32,8 +32,9 @@ test_expect_success setup '
 	git commit -m fifth  &&
 
 	git rm a/two &&
+	echo -e "sixth\n\nlineone\nlinetwo" >sixth &&
 	test_tick &&
-	git commit -m sixth
+	git commit -F sixth
 
 '
 
@@ -63,8 +64,15 @@ test_expect_success 'format' '
 	test_cmp expect actual
 '
 
+printf "sixth\n\n lineone\n linetwo\n%%B(-1)\n" > expect
+test_expect_success 'format (subject %s, body %B(1), %B(-1))' '
+
+	git log --format="%s%n%n%B(1)%n%B(-1)" 394ef78..5821e35 > actual &&
+	test_cmp expect actual
+'
+
 cat > expect << EOF
-804a787 sixth
+5821e35 sixth
 394ef78 fifth
 5d31159 fourth
 2fbe8c0 third
@@ -150,22 +158,22 @@ test_expect_success 'git log --follow' '
 '
 
 cat > expect << EOF
-804a787 sixth
+5821e35 sixth
 394ef78 fifth
 5d31159 fourth
 EOF
 test_expect_success 'git log --no-walk <commits> sorts by commit time' '
-	git log --no-walk --oneline 5d31159 804a787 394ef78 > actual &&
+	git log --no-walk --oneline 5d31159 5821e35 394ef78 > actual &&
 	test_cmp expect actual
 '
 
 cat > expect << EOF
 5d31159 fourth
-804a787 sixth
+5821e35 sixth
 394ef78 fifth
 EOF
 test_expect_success 'git show <commits> leaves list of commits as given' '
-	git show --oneline -s 5d31159 804a787 394ef78 > actual &&
+	git show --oneline -s 5d31159 5821e35 394ef78 > actual &&
 	test_cmp expect actual
 '
 
-- 
1.6.5.rc1.38.g1fbd3

Re: [PATCH] Test for correct behaviour on %B(1) and %B(-1)

[Junio C Hamano]

Johannes Gilger <heipei@hackvalue.de> writes:

> seeing as the %B-patch is in your pu you seem to be almost happy with it.

Being in 'pu' does not mean that much; it just means that I do not want to
lose the patch and nothing more.  I'll squash the test in anyway.

We may want to build on this further to cover Dscho's line-wrap but that
is independent of this addition.

Thanks.