On 8/6/2019 5:21 AM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 09:43:41AM -0700, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote: > >> In such a case, the reading >> process outputs the following message to stderr: >> >> warning: commit-graph chain does not match >> >> These warnings are output in the test suite, but ignored. By >> checking the stderr of `git commit-graph verify` to include >> the expected progress output, it will now catch this error. > > There should be a better way to check this than relying on the number > of progress lines, e.g. 'git commit-graph verify' could print > something specific, like "Verified 3 commit-graph files, all OK", to > its standard output, and the test should check only that. Or check > only that there is no warning on standard error. > > On one hand, see the recent commits 077b979891 (t3404: make the > 'rebase.missingCommitsCheck=ignore' test more focused, 2019-06-24) and > bb431c3dad (t3420: remove progress lines before comparing output, > 2019-07-04), where we started to exclude the progress output from > verification in tests like this that are not specifically about > progress output. > > On the other hand, one of my fun side-projects is to run some > semi-automated and souped-up CI builds of currently cooking topics, > which include a custom GETTEXT_POISON mode [1], where the poisoned > translated progress output in this new test looks like this [2]: > > V.e.r.i.f.y.i.n.g. .c.o.m.m.i.t.s. .i.n. .c.o.m.m.i.t. .g.r.a.p.h.: 100% (1/1), d.o.n.e.. > V.e.r.i.f.y.i.n.g. .c.o.m.m.i.t.s. .i.n. .c.o.m.m.i.t. .g.r.a.p.h.: 100% (5/5), d.o.n.e.. > V.e.r.i.f.y.i.n.g. .c.o.m.m.i.t.s. .i.n. .c.o.m.m.i.t. .g.r.a.p.h.: > 100% (12/12), d.o.n.e.. > > So this makes the progress lines almost twice as long, and as the last > commit-graph file contains double-digit commits, the length of the > progress line just happens to exceed the width of a 80 character > terminal, and gets line wrapped. This throws off the line count > check, as there are now 4 lines on standard error instead of the > expected 3. Thanks for pointing out that the poison runs can change the number of lines. My intention was to ensure "we got the amount of output we expected" but it is enough to only use test_i18ngrep to check that no warnings occurred. Thanks, -Stolee
