* [PATCH] test: bisect-porcelain: fix location of files @ 2020-12-18 15:14 Felipe Contreras 2020-12-18 15:36 ` Christian Couder 2020-12-21 21:08 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2020-12-18 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: git Cc: Pranit Bauva, Junio C Hamano, Christian Couder, Lars Schneider, Felipe Contreras Commit ba7eafe146 (t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup, 2017-09-29) introduced checks for files in the $GIT_DIR directory, but that variable is not always defined, and in this test file it's not. Therefore these checks always passed regardless of the presence of these files (unless the user has some /BISECT_LOG file, for some reason). Let's check the files in the correct location. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> --- t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 16 ++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh index 34099160ed..6d5440d704 100755 --- a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh +++ b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh @@ -926,14 +926,14 @@ test_expect_success 'git bisect reset cleans bisection state properly' ' git bisect bad $HASH4 && git bisect reset && test -z "$(git for-each-ref "refs/bisect/*")" && - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" && - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" && - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_LOG" && - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN" && - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" && - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/head-name" && - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_HEAD" && - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_START" + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" && + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" && + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_LOG" && + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_RUN" && + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_TERMS" && + test_path_is_missing ".git/head-name" && + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_HEAD" && + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_START" ' test_done -- 2.30.0.rc0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] test: bisect-porcelain: fix location of files 2020-12-18 15:14 [PATCH] test: bisect-porcelain: fix location of files Felipe Contreras @ 2020-12-18 15:36 ` Christian Couder 2020-12-18 15:50 ` Felipe Contreras 2020-12-21 20:10 ` Junio C Hamano 2020-12-21 21:08 ` Junio C Hamano 1 sibling, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Christian Couder @ 2020-12-18 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras Cc: git, Pranit Bauva, Junio C Hamano, Christian Couder, Lars Schneider On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 4:14 PM Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: > > Commit ba7eafe146 (t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup, > 2017-09-29) introduced checks for files in the $GIT_DIR directory, but > that variable is not always defined, and in this test file it's not. > > Therefore these checks always passed regardless of the presence of these > files (unless the user has some /BISECT_LOG file, for some reason). > > Let's check the files in the correct location. This looks good to me, but... > index 34099160ed..6d5440d704 100755 > --- a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh > +++ b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh > @@ -926,14 +926,14 @@ test_expect_success 'git bisect reset cleans bisection state properly' ' > git bisect bad $HASH4 && ...if we wanted this kind of bug not to happen again, we could add a test here, before `git bisect reset`, to check that here one of the files below actually exists. > git bisect reset && > test -z "$(git for-each-ref "refs/bisect/*")" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_LOG" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/head-name" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_HEAD" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_START" > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_LOG" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_RUN" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_TERMS" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/head-name" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_HEAD" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_START" > ' Thanks, Christian. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] test: bisect-porcelain: fix location of files 2020-12-18 15:36 ` Christian Couder @ 2020-12-18 15:50 ` Felipe Contreras 2020-12-21 20:10 ` Junio C Hamano 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Felipe Contreras @ 2020-12-18 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christian Couder, Felipe Contreras Cc: git, Pranit Bauva, Junio C Hamano, Christian Couder, Lars Schneider Christian Couder wrote: > On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 4:14 PM Felipe Contreras > <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: > ...if we wanted this kind of bug not to happen again, we could add a > test here, before `git bisect reset`, to check that here one of the > files below actually exists. Yeah, but that's like testing the test-case. Unless the .git directory is renamed by default (like s/master/main), there would never be a need to update this in the same way. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] test: bisect-porcelain: fix location of files 2020-12-18 15:36 ` Christian Couder 2020-12-18 15:50 ` Felipe Contreras @ 2020-12-21 20:10 ` Junio C Hamano 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2020-12-21 20:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christian Couder Cc: Felipe Contreras, git, Pranit Bauva, Christian Couder, Lars Schneider Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 4:14 PM Felipe Contreras > <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Commit ba7eafe146 (t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup, >> 2017-09-29) introduced checks for files in the $GIT_DIR directory, but >> that variable is not always defined, and in this test file it's not. >> >> Therefore these checks always passed regardless of the presence of these >> files (unless the user has some /BISECT_LOG file, for some reason). >> >> Let's check the files in the correct location. > > This looks good to me, but... > >> index 34099160ed..6d5440d704 100755 >> --- a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh >> +++ b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh >> @@ -926,14 +926,14 @@ test_expect_success 'git bisect reset cleans bisection state properly' ' >> git bisect bad $HASH4 && > > ...if we wanted this kind of bug not to happen again, we could add a > test here, before `git bisect reset`, to check that here one of the > files below actually exists. It may make sense in the larger context of making sure "git bisect" keeps the log in expected location. If we do not have the basic test to do so, we probably should add one separately. But "git bisect reset cleans" test should be able to assume that these files are stored in their correct place, and test only their removal. An alternative and possibly a better way may be, before reset, to ask "git bisect" command itself to see if it can retrieve what is stored in one of these files. Perhaps "git bisect terms" would work only when .git/BISECT_TERMS is there. You need to cover other files in a similar way. Such a testing strategy would make sure what we truly care about will keep working, no matter how internal implementation changes in the future. In a sense, we do not really care the log file is called BISECT_LOG or stored directly under .git/ directory ---we care that the information is kept somewhere to allow "git bisect" to work with, and upon "git bisect reset", the information is wiped away (so you'd test that, after "git bisect reset", "git bisect terms" would behave differently without the BISECT_TERMS file). Hmm? For now, the hunk I see below looks like a pure improvement, but I do not have the original patch handy, so... >> git bisect reset && >> test -z "$(git for-each-ref "refs/bisect/*")" && >> - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" && >> - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" && >> - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_LOG" && >> - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN" && >> - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" && >> - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/head-name" && >> - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_HEAD" && >> - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_START" >> + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" && >> + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" && >> + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_LOG" && >> + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_RUN" && >> + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_TERMS" && >> + test_path_is_missing ".git/head-name" && >> + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_HEAD" && >> + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_START" >> ' Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] test: bisect-porcelain: fix location of files 2020-12-18 15:14 [PATCH] test: bisect-porcelain: fix location of files Felipe Contreras 2020-12-18 15:36 ` Christian Couder @ 2020-12-21 21:08 ` Junio C Hamano 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2020-12-21 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Felipe Contreras; +Cc: git, Pranit Bauva, Christian Couder, Lars Schneider Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes: > Commit ba7eafe146 (t6030: explicitly test for bisection cleanup, > 2017-09-29) introduced checks for files in the $GIT_DIR directory, but > that variable is not always defined, and in this test file it's not. It is somewhat surprising that nobody caught it for 3 years, but perhaps nobody cared very deeply (and it must have helped that the feature it purports to test is not broken). Will queue. > > Therefore these checks always passed regardless of the presence of these > files (unless the user has some /BISECT_LOG file, for some reason). > > Let's check the files in the correct location. > > Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> > --- > t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 16 ++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh > index 34099160ed..6d5440d704 100755 > --- a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh > +++ b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh > @@ -926,14 +926,14 @@ test_expect_success 'git bisect reset cleans bisection state properly' ' > git bisect bad $HASH4 && > git bisect reset && > test -z "$(git for-each-ref "refs/bisect/*")" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_LOG" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/head-name" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_HEAD" && > - test_path_is_missing "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_START" > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_EXPECTED_REV" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_ANCESTORS_OK" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_LOG" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_RUN" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_TERMS" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/head-name" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_HEAD" && > + test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_START" > ' > > test_done ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-12-21 21:09 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2020-12-18 15:14 [PATCH] test: bisect-porcelain: fix location of files Felipe Contreras 2020-12-18 15:36 ` Christian Couder 2020-12-18 15:50 ` Felipe Contreras 2020-12-21 20:10 ` Junio C Hamano 2020-12-21 21:08 ` Junio C Hamano
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).