Some committishes might point to the same commit, but through a
different ref, that's why it's better to check directly for the ref,
rather than the commit message.
We can do that by calling rev-parse --symbolic-full-name, and to
differentiate the old from the new behavior we add an extra argument to
the check() helper.
Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx>
---
t/t1508-at-combinations.sh | 27 ++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/t1508-at-combinations.sh b/t/t1508-at-combinations.sh
index 46e3f16..bd2d2fe 100755
--- a/t/t1508-at-combinations.sh
+++ b/t/t1508-at-combinations.sh
@@ -4,9 +4,14 @@ test_description='test various @{X} syntax combinations together'
. ./test-lib.sh
check() {
-test_expect_${3:-success} "$1 = $2" "
- echo '$2' >expect &&
- git log -1 --format=%s '$1' >actual &&
+test_expect_${4:-success} "$1 = $3" "
+ if [ '$2' == 'commit' ]; then
+ echo '$3' >expect &&
+ git log -1 --format=%s '$1' >actual
+ else
+ echo '$3' >expect &&
+ git rev-parse --symbolic-full-name '$1' >actual
+ fi &&
test_cmp expect actual
"
}
@@ -35,14 +40,14 @@ test_expect_success 'setup' '
git branch -u upstream-branch new-branch
'
-check HEAD new-two
-check "@{1}" new-one
-check "@{-1}" old-two
-check "@{-1}@{1}" old-one
-check "@{u}" upstream-two
-check "@{u}@{1}" upstream-one
-check "@{-1}@{u}" master-two
-check "@{-1}@{u}@{1}" master-one
+check HEAD ref refs/heads/new-branch
+check "@{1}" commit new-one
+check "@{-1}" ref refs/heads/old-branch
+check "@{-1}@{1}" commit old-one
+check "@{u}" ref refs/heads/upstream-branch
+check "@{u}@{1}" commit upstream-one
+check "@{-1}@{u}" ref refs/heads/master
+check "@{-1}@{u}@{1}" commit master-one
nonsense "@{u}@{-1}"
nonsense "@{1}@{u}"
--
1.8.3.rc0.401.g45bba44
--
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