Re: [PATCH v6 09/11] pack-objects: shrink size field in struct object_entry

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 07:08:07PM +0100, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>
>> BTW can you apply this patch? This broken && chain made me think the
>> problem was in the next test. It would have saved me lots of time if I
>> saw this "BUG" line coming from the previous test.
>>
>> -- 8< --
>> Subject: [PATCH] t9300: fix broken && chain
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  t/t9300-fast-import.sh | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/t/t9300-fast-import.sh b/t/t9300-fast-import.sh
>> index e4d06accc4..e2a0ae4075 100755
>> --- a/t/t9300-fast-import.sh
>> +++ b/t/t9300-fast-import.sh
>> @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ test_expect_success 'B: accept branch name "TEMP_TAG"' '
>>       INPUT_END
>>
>>       test_when_finished "rm -f .git/TEMP_TAG
>> -             git gc
>> +             git gc &&
>>               git prune" &&
>
> The &&-chain is broken from the first command, too. It's "rm -f", which
> is not that big a deal, but...
>
>> @@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ test_expect_success 'B: accept empty committer' '
>>       INPUT_END
>>
>>       test_when_finished "git update-ref -d refs/heads/empty-committer-1
>> -             git gc
>> +             git gc &&
>>               git prune" &&
>
> Same here, but we probably care more about noticing update-ref failure.

Yes. I wasn't sure if that update-ref could fail but did not check
since this was a side issue for me.
-- 
Duy




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux