newren@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > Should I have just squashed this with the previous patch? Or with the > other testcase patch? I think squashing it with the previous one is better as long as this is directly related to patch 1. > > t/t9301-fast-export.sh | 8 +++++++- > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/t/t9301-fast-export.sh b/t/t9301-fast-export.sh > index 8c8a9e6..d17f0e4 100755 > --- a/t/t9301-fast-export.sh > +++ b/t/t9301-fast-export.sh > @@ -272,7 +272,13 @@ test_expect_success 'set-up a few more tags for tag export tests' ' > ' > > # NEEDSWORK: not just check return status, but validate the output Is this comment still relevant? > -test_expect_success 'tree_tag' 'git fast-export tree_tag' > +test_expect_success 'tree_tag' ' > + mkdir result && > + cd result && > + git init && > + cd .. > + git fast-export tree_tag | (cd result && git fast-import) > +' > test_expect_success 'tree_tag-obj' 'git fast-export tree_tag-obj' > test_expect_success 'tag-obj_tag' 'git fast-export tag-obj_tag' > test_expect_success 'tag-obj_tag-obj' 'git fast-export tag-obj_tag-obj' I don't really know, but could test_create_repo() be useful here? -- 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