Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> Since we obviously don't have even a single test for "--bisect", that >> might be worth adding. > > It turns out we do, but none that actually check that we use the default > refnames. So maybe squash this in? Sounds sensible. Thanks. > > diff --git a/t/t6002-rev-list-bisect.sh b/t/t6002-rev-list-bisect.sh > index 3bf2759ea..534903bbd 100755 > --- a/t/t6002-rev-list-bisect.sh > +++ b/t/t6002-rev-list-bisect.sh > @@ -235,4 +235,18 @@ test_sequence "--bisect" > > # > # > + > +test_expect_success '--bisect can default to good/bad refs' ' > + git update-ref refs/bisect/bad c3 && > + good=$(git rev-parse b1) && > + git update-ref refs/bisect/good-$good $good && > + good=$(git rev-parse c1) && > + git update-ref refs/bisect/good-$good $good && > + > + # the only thing between c3 and c1 is c2 > + git rev-parse c2 >expect && > + git rev-list --bisect >actual && > + test_cmp expect actual > +' > + > test_done