Re: [GSoC][PATCH v1] t9811: avoid pipe in git commands in test script

[Khalid Ali <khalludi123@gmail.com>]

Thanks for the feedback Junio.

I was wondering if I should resubmit the patch without my comments.
Also, I was wondering if I should be adding a call to check the exit codes
of this test and the file called 'actual' at the end of the script.

On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 10:39 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Khalid Ali <khalludi123@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > The exit code of the upstream in a pipe is ignored thus we
> > should avoid using it. By writing out the output of the git command to a
> > file, we can test the exit codes of both the commands.
>
> End the log message here by moving the next two paragraphs below the
> three-dash line.
>
> >
> > Aside from the commit message, I plan to apply for GSoC. Planning to
> > solve the rebase/cherry-pick issue or adding functionality for the
> > rebase interactive command.
> >
> > Any review on this commit would be appreciated!
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Khalid Ali <khalludi123@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh | 11 ++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh b/t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh
> > index 602b0a5d5c..2f4e80ed55 100755
> > --- a/t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh
> > +++ b/t/t9811-git-p4-label-import.sh
> > @@ -63,7 +63,8 @@ test_expect_success 'basic p4 labels' '
> >               git checkout TAG_WITH\$_SHELL_CHAR &&
> >               test -f f1 && test -f f2 && test -f file_with_\$metachar &&
> >
> > -             git show TAG_LONG_LABEL | grep -q "A Label second line"
> > +             git show TAG_LONG_LABEL >actual &&
> > +             grep -q "A Label second line" actual
>
> There is no mention of file 'actual' before this patch, so we can
> reasonably be sure that we are not breaking expectations of existing
> test that a file with that name has contents different from what the
> above command produces.  On the other hand, if later tests have
> things like "git add ." or "git status -s" and expects that there is
> no such file called 'actual', this change may have broken the
> expectation.
>
> I *think* the above is done after going inside $git directory, which
> will be removed with "test_when_finished cleanup_git", so it is
> fairly clear that leaving an extra file 'actual' behind at this
> point is safe.
>
> This is not a problem with this conversion, but we tend to avoid
> squelching standard output to help debugging tests.  An independent
> clean-up patch may want to replace "grep -q" with just "grep".
>
> > @@ -92,9 +93,9 @@ test_expect_success 'two labels on the same changelist' '
> >               cd "$git" &&
> >               git p4 sync --import-labels &&
> >
> > -             git tag | grep TAG_F1 &&
> > -             git tag | grep -q TAG_F1_1 &&
> > -             git tag | grep -q TAG_F1_2 &&
> > +             git tag >actual && grep TAG_F1 actual &&
> > +             git tag >actual && grep -q TAG_F1_1 actual &&
> > +             git tag >actual && grep -q TAG_F1_2 actual &&
>
> Ditto.
>
> >
> >               cd main &&
> >
> > @@ -205,7 +206,7 @@ test_expect_success 'use git config to enable import/export of tags' '
> >               git p4 rebase --verbose &&
> >               git p4 submit --verbose &&
> >               git tag &&
> > -             git tag | grep TAG_F1_1
> > +             git tag >actual && grep TAG_F1_1 actual
> >       ) &&
>
> I notice that this test piece does not call cleanup_git when it is
> done.  I think that is a mistake (not introduced by this patch) that
> ma want to get fixed independently.
>
> >       (
> >               cd "$cli" &&