Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: Allow missing base objects when creating thin packs
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:18:43 -0700
- From: "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: Allow missing base objects when creating thin packs
Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> > +# Clone patch_clone indirectly by cloning base and fetching.
> > +#
> > +test_expect_success \
> > + 'indirectly clone patch_clone' \
> > + '(mkdir user_clone &&
> > + cd user_clone &&
> > + git init &&
> > + git pull ../.git &&
> > + test $(git rev-parse HEAD) = $B
> > +
> > + git pull ../patch_clone/.git &&
> > + test $(git rev-parse HEAD) = $C
> > + )
> > + '
>
> What if the first test command fails? Won't its result be ignored?
Isn't the exit status of the subshell the exit status of the last
command in the subshell?
I just changed the test line to compare to "x$C" instead of $C
and it correctly detected the error condition:
$ git diff
diff --git a/t/t5306-pack-nobase.sh b/t/t5306-pack-nobase.sh
index 503e9d4..7c55e9e 100755
--- a/t/t5306-pack-nobase.sh
+++ b/t/t5306-pack-nobase.sh
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ test_expect_success \
test $(git rev-parse HEAD) = $B
git pull ../patch_clone/.git &&
- test $(git rev-parse HEAD) = $C
+ test $(git rev-parse HEAD) = x$C
)
'
$ ./t5306-pack-nobase.sh
* ok 1: setup base
* ok 2: setup patch_clone
* FAIL 3: indirectly clone patch_clone
(mkdir user_clone &&
cd user_clone &&
git init &&
git pull ../.git &&
test $(git rev-parse HEAD) = $B
git pull ../patch_clone/.git &&
test $(git rev-parse HEAD) = x$C
)
* ok 4: clone of patch_clone is incomplete
* failed 1 among 4 test(s)
--
Shawn.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html