Henning Schild <henning.schild@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Valid values are already covered by all tests that use GPG, now also > test what happens if we go for an invalid one. > > Signed-off-by: Henning Schild <henning.schild@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > t/t7510-signed-commit.sh | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/t/t7510-signed-commit.sh b/t/t7510-signed-commit.sh > index 6e2015ed9..cb523513f 100755 > --- a/t/t7510-signed-commit.sh > +++ b/t/t7510-signed-commit.sh > @@ -227,4 +227,14 @@ test_expect_success GPG 'log.showsignature behaves like --show-signature' ' > grep "gpg: Good signature" actual > ' > > +test_expect_success GPG 'check gpg config for malformed values' ' > + mv .git/config .git/config.old && > + test_when_finished "mv .git/config.old .git/config" && Hmmmmm. Is the damage caused by throwing a bad value at gpg.format designed to be so severe that "test_when_finished test_unconfig ..." cannot recover from? This test script is not about how "git config" is implemented and works, so it would be a good idea for it to be even oblivious to the fact that .git/config is the file being mucked with when we do "git config". I have a suspicion that you can just use test_config (which would arrange "test_when_finished test_unconfig ..." for free). > + git config gpg.format malformed && > + test_expect_code 128 git commit -S --amend -m "fail" 2>result && Is this 128 something we document and have users rely on? Or should we rather say test_must_fail git commit ... here instead? > + test_i18ngrep "malformed value for gpg.format: malformed" result && > + test_i18ngrep "fatal: .*\.git/config" result && > + test_i18ngrep "fatal: .*line 2" result > +' > + > test_done
