vitor.hda@xxxxxxxxx wrote on Wed, 23 May 2012 00:38 +0100: > Current implementation of new branch parent detection works on the > principle that the new branch is a complete integration, with no > changes, of the original files. > This test shows this deficiency in the particular case when the new > branch is created from a subset of the original files. > > Signed-off-by: Vitor Antunes <vitor.hda@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > t/t9801-git-p4-branch.sh | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/t/t9801-git-p4-branch.sh b/t/t9801-git-p4-branch.sh > index 89d8c59..c8e4d86 100755 > --- a/t/t9801-git-p4-branch.sh > +++ b/t/t9801-git-p4-branch.sh > @@ -360,6 +360,62 @@ test_expect_success 'git p4 sync changes to two branches in the same changelist' > ) > ' > > +# Create a branch by integrating a single file > +test_expect_success 'git p4 file subset branch' ' > + test_when_finished cleanup_git && > + test_create_repo "$git" && Ditto; no need for git here. > + ( > + cd "$cli" && > + p4 integrate //depot/branch1/file1 //depot/branch6/file1 && > + p4 submit -d "Integrate file1 alone from branch1 to branch6" > + ) > +' > + > +# Check if git -p4 creates a new branch containing a single file, Stray "-" -------^ > +# instead of keeping the old files from the original branch > +test_expect_failure 'git p4 clone file subset branch' ' > + test_when_finished cleanup_git && > + test_create_repo "$git" && > + ( > + cd "$git" && > + git config git-p4.branchList branch1:branch2 && > + git config --add git-p4.branchList branch1:branch3 && > + git config --add git-p4.branchList branch1:branch4 && > + git config --add git-p4.branchList branch1:branch5 && > + git config --add git-p4.branchList branch1:branch6 && > + "$GITP4" clone --dest=. --detect-branches //depot@all && Rebase error? It fails because this should be "git p4". > + git log --all --graph --decorate --stat && > + git reset --hard p4/depot/branch1 && > + test_path_is_file file1 && > + test_path_is_file file2 && > + test_path_is_file file3 && > + grep update file2 && > + git reset --hard p4/depot/branch2 && > + test_path_is_file file1 && > + test_path_is_file file2 && > + test_path_is_missing file3 && > + ! grep update file2 && > + git reset --hard p4/depot/branch3 && > + test_path_is_file file1 && > + test_path_is_file file2 && > + test_path_is_missing file3 && > + grep update file2 && > + git reset --hard p4/depot/branch4 && > + test_path_is_file file1 && > + test_path_is_file file2 && > + test_path_is_file file3 && > + ! grep update file2 && > + git reset --hard p4/depot/branch5 && > + test_path_is_file file1 && > + test_path_is_file file2 && > + test_path_is_file file3 && > + ! grep update file2 && > + git reset --hard p4/depot/branch6 && > + test_path_is_file file1 && > + ! test_path_is_file file2 && But then it fails here too because the code is indeed buggy. Nice to have this test too, to document the problem and maybe prod someone to fix it someday. > + ! test_path_is_file file3 Do use "test_path_is_missing" for these non-existant file tests, though, please. -- Pete > + ) > +' > test_expect_success 'kill p4d' ' > kill_p4d > ' > -- > 1.7.7.rc2.14.g5e044.dirty > -- 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