On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 11:19:20PM +0530, Shourya Shukla wrote: > The '--for-status' test got its expected output from stdin. This is > inconsistent with the other tests in the test script which get their > expected output from a file named 'expected'. > > So, change the syntax of the '--for-status' test for uniformity. ... serves me right for not reading the whole thread before responding to the previous patch ;). On a technical note, I don't think this is different enough from the previous patch that they couldn't be combined. (A good indicator of this is that I expected this change to be included in 2/4 and was surprised that it was a separate step afterwords). > Mentored-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Mentored-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Shourya Shukla <shouryashukla.oo@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > t/t7401-submodule-summary.sh | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/t/t7401-submodule-summary.sh b/t/t7401-submodule-summary.sh > index 18fefdb0ba..145914cd5a 100755 > --- a/t/t7401-submodule-summary.sh > +++ b/t/t7401-submodule-summary.sh > @@ -285,13 +285,14 @@ EOF > > test_expect_success '--for-status' " > git submodule summary --for-status HEAD^ >actual && > - test_i18ncmp actual - <<EOF > + cat >expected <<-EOF && > * sm1 $head6...0000000: > > * sm2 0000000...$head7 (2): > > Add foo9 > > EOF > + test_i18ncmp expected actual > " I think that this is on the right track, but you can use a '<<-\EOF' here instead of '<<-EOF' to make the tabulation a little more flexible. > > test_expect_success 'fail when using --files together with --cached' " > -- > 2.27.0 Thanks, Taylor
