On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 01:07:32PM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 02:00:12PM -0700, William Baker via GitGitGadget wrote: > > diff --git a/t/t7519-status-fsmonitor.sh b/t/t7519-status-fsmonitor.sh > > index 81a375fa0f..87042470ab 100755 > > --- a/t/t7519-status-fsmonitor.sh > > +++ b/t/t7519-status-fsmonitor.sh > > @@ -354,4 +354,17 @@ test_expect_success 'discard_index() also discards fsmonitor info' ' > > test_cmp expect actual > > ' > > > > +# This test covers staging/unstaging files that appear at the end of the index. > > +# Test files with names beginning with 'z' are used under the assumption that > > +# earlier tests do not add/leave index entries that sort below them. I just read through Junio's comments on the first version of this patch, in particular his remarks about this comment. If this new test case below were run in a dedicated repository, then this comment wouldn't be necessary, and all my comments below about that not-really-initial commit would be moot, too. > > +test_expect_success 'status succeeds after staging/unstaging ' ' > > + test_commit initial && > > This is confusing: this is the 29th test case in this script and it > creates an "initial" commit?! > > The first "setup" test case has already created an initial commit, so > this should rather be called "second". > > OTOH, none of the later commands in this test case seem to have > anything to do with this second commit, and indeed the test case works > even without it (i.e. 'git status' still segfaults without the fix and > then succeeds with the fix applied), so instead of updating its > message perhaps it could simply be removed. > > > + removed=$(test_seq 1 100 | sed "s/^/z/") && > > + touch $removed && > > + git add $removed && > > + test_config core.fsmonitor "$TEST_DIRECTORY/t7519/fsmonitor-env" && > > + FSMONITOR_LIST="$removed" git restore -S $removed && > > + FSMONITOR_LIST="$removed" git status > > +' > > + > > test_done
