Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> t/t5520-pull.sh | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/t5520-pull.sh b/t/t5520-pull.sh
> index 319e389..9099e55 100755
> --- a/t/t5520-pull.sh
> +++ b/t/t5520-pull.sh
> @@ -4,6 +4,11 @@ test_description='pulling into void'
>
> . ./test-lib.sh
>
> +modify () {
> + sed -e "$1" < "$2" > "$2".x &&
> + mv "$2".x "$2"
> +}
Just a style thing but I'd prefer to see the above written like this:
modify () {
sed -e "$1" <"$2" >"$2.x" &&
mv "$2.x" "$2"
}
> +test_expect_success 'setup for avoiding reapplying old patches' '
> + (cd dst &&
> + git rebase --abort;
This may be hypothetical but this discards error condition from failing to
ch into dst (for whatever reason). Don't we expect "git rebase --abort"
to exit with a non-zero status? Same comment for the last one in the
patch below.
> +test_expect_failure 'git pull --rebase does not reapply old patches' '
> + (cd dst &&
> + git pull --rebase;
> + test 1 = $(find .git/rebase-apply -name "000*" | wc -l)
> + )
> +'
> +
> test_done
Thanks.
--
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