On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 05:58:04PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> Test behavior of `git clone` when working with an empty path > >> component. This may be the case when cloning a file system's root > >> directory or from a remote server's root. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> > >> --- > >> diff --git a/t/t1509-root-worktree.sh b/t/t1509-root-worktree.sh > >> index 553a3f6..acfa133 100755 > >> --- a/t/t1509-root-worktree.sh > >> +++ b/t/t1509-root-worktree.sh > >> @@ -237,6 +237,45 @@ test_foobar_foobar > > All true, but a more interesting question is why add more to this > test, which is known to be skipped by everybody? The issue being > corrected is that any "<scheme>://<user>@<pass>:<site>/" that says > "the whole site serves a single repository" is problematic. > > Surely, file:// and ssh:// may be examples of schemes that require > the filesystem root to be usable as the trash directory to test, > requiring a dedicated VM (causing most people to skip t1509), but > wouldn't "http://<user>@<pass>:<site>/" be easier to arrange to make > the whole site serve a single repository? Sure it would be. But unfortunately I haven't been able to get t/lib-httpd working at my end, so that's why I then chose to implement the tests with t1509. I agree though that the other solution would be preferable, but I currently am not able to provide those.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature