On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 03:22:50PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Rerolled patch is below. Sorry for all the emails. I'll stop looking at
> > it now to give you guys a chance to find any remaining mistakes. ;)
>
> Does 1308 pass with this patch for you (running it without "-x")?
Hmph. It does not. I know that "make test" passed with an earlier
iteration, but I must have gotten so wrapped up in testing "make
GIT_TEST_OPTS=-x test" that I never ran a vanilla "make test" on
what I finally posted. Sorry.
> The original that expects a hardcoded line number (not relative to
> the original or something) is a bad taste, and also the test setup
> procedure is broken (see below for a fix of that breakage, which
> does not fix the breakage this patch seems to bring in anyway).
Yeah, I agree, and your patch below looks reasonable.
> But still it is disturbing to see that there is a blank line
> difference with and without this change in the file created by the
> test (i.e. the client of the code this patch touches).
This fixes it:
diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
index 4dab575..059bb25 100644
--- a/t/test-lib.sh
+++ b/t/test-lib.sh
@@ -528,8 +528,7 @@ maybe_setup_valgrind () {
test_eval_inner_ () {
eval "
test \"$trace\" = t && set -x
- $*
- "
+ $*"
}
test_eval_ () {
My patch definitely expands the snippet with an extra trailing newline.
But what I really don't understand is why that would impact the
_contents_ of the config file.
I'll dig further, but I'm about to leave the computer for dinner for a
few hours, so please don't hold your breath. :)
-Peff
--
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