Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Emily Shaffer wrote: > >> --- a/t/t0091-bugreport.sh >> +++ b/t/t0091-bugreport.sh >> @@ -57,5 +57,15 @@ test_expect_success 'can create leading directories outside of a git dir' ' >> nongit git bugreport -o foo/bar/baz >> ' >> >> +test_expect_success 'indicates populated hooks' ' >> + test_when_finished rm git-bugreport-hooks.txt && >> + test_when_finished rm -fr .git/hooks && >> + mkdir .git/hooks && >> + touch .git/hooks/applypatch-msg && >> + chmod +x .git/hooks/applypatch-msg && > > optional: could use write_script for this Yup, it is a good practice to do so. Use of touch is especially bad here, as it is quite plausible for us to later change the "is the hook there?" check to exclude a completely empty file. >> + git bugreport -s hooks && >> + test_i18ngrep applypatch-msg git-bugreport-hooks.txt > > This should work even when translated, so it can use "grep" instead of > test_i18ngrep. Nicely spotted. Thanks.
