Re: [PATCH 1/6] test patch hunk editing with "commit -p -m"

[Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>]

On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Benoit Pierre <benoit.pierre@gmail.com> wrote:
> Add (failing) test: with commit changing the environment to let hooks
> now that no editor will be used (by setting GIT_EDITOR to ":"), the
> "edit hunk" functionality does not work (no editor is launched and the
> whole hunk is committed).
>
> Signed-off-by: Benoit Pierre <benoit.pierre@gmail.com>
> ---
>  t/t7513-commit_-p_-m_hunk_edit.sh | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100755 t/t7513-commit_-p_-m_hunk_edit.sh

A rather unusual filename.

> diff --git a/t/t7513-commit_-p_-m_hunk_edit.sh b/t/t7513-commit_-p_-m_hunk_edit.sh
> new file mode 100755
> index 0000000..e0ad905
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/t/t7513-commit_-p_-m_hunk_edit.sh
> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
> +#!/bin/sh
> +
> +test_description='hunk edit with "commit -p -m"'
> +. ./test-lib.sh
> +
> +if ! test_have_prereq PERL
> +then
> +       skip_all="skipping '$test_description' tests, perl not available"
> +       test_done
> +fi
> +
> +test_expect_success 'setup (initial)' '
> +       echo line1 >file &&
> +       git add file &&
> +       git commit -m commit1

Broken &&-chain.

> +       echo line3 >>file
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'setup expected' '
> +cat >expected <<EOF
> +diff --git a/file b/file
> +index a29bdeb..c0d0fb4 100644
> +--- a/file
> ++++ b/file
> +@@ -1 +1,2 @@
> + line1
> ++line2
> +EOF
> +'

If you use <<-EOF, you can indent the content you're dumping into
'expected', which can enhance readability. Even better, use <<-\EOF to
indicate that you don't want interpolation done within the content.

> +test_expect_failure 'edit hunk "commit -p -m message"' '
> +       echo e | env GIT_EDITOR="sed s/+line3\$/+line2/ -i" git commit -p -m commit2 file &&
> +       git diff HEAD^ HEAD >diff &&
> +       test_cmp expected diff
> +'

If you ever add more tests, is it likely that they will be using the
same 'expected' file used by this test? If not, perhaps it makes sense
to move creation of 'expected' into the test itself.

> +test_done
> --
> 1.9.0