2017-03-21 16:28 GMT-06:00 Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>>> test_expect_success 'log.decorate configuration' '
>>> - git log --oneline >expect.none &&
>>> + git log --oneline --no-decorate >expect.none &&
>>> git log --oneline --decorate >expect.short &&
>>> git log --oneline --decorate=full >expect.full &&
>>
>> This ensures that an explicit --no-decorate from the command line
>> does give "none" output, which we failed to do so far, and is a good
>> change. Don't we also need a _new_ test to ensure that "auto" kicks
>> in without any explicit request? Knowing the implementation that
>> pager-in-use triggers the "auto" behaviour, perhaps testing the
>> output from "git -p log" would be sufficient?
>
> BTW,
>
>>
>> +static int auto_decoration_style()
>> +{
>> + return (isatty(1) || pager_in_use()) ? DECORATE_SHORT_REFS : 0;
>> +}
>
> FYI, I fixed this to
>
> static int auto_decoration_style(void)
>
> while queuing to make it compile.
No problem. Do I need to submit a second version of the patch with a
test for `git -p log`?
-Alex