Derrick Stolee <stolee@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Perhaps the test I requested in patch 1 is only appropriate > here? Or, maybe the test should be test_expect_failure in the > first patch and switched to test_expect_success here? Either is OK, but it is probably easier to read to have just one addition in 2/2 to expect succeses. Temporarily revierting with "git show ':!t' | git apply -R" before running test when you want to reallly see how the original crashed is easy and simple enough. Thanks.
