On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 09:35:15PM +0000, Nipunn Koorapati via GitGitGadget wrote: > diff --git a/t/perf/p7519-fsmonitor.sh b/t/perf/p7519-fsmonitor.sh > index 9313d4a51d..2b4803707f 100755 > --- a/t/perf/p7519-fsmonitor.sh > +++ b/t/perf/p7519-fsmonitor.sh > @@ -115,6 +115,13 @@ test_expect_success "setup for fsmonitor" ' > > git config core.fsmonitor "$INTEGRATION_SCRIPT" && > git update-index --fsmonitor && > + mkdir 1_file 10_files 100_files 1000_files 10000_files && > + for i in `seq 1 10`; do touch 10_files/$i; done && > + for i in `seq 1 100`; do touch 100_files/$i; done && > + for i in `seq 1 1000`; do touch 1000_files/$i; done && > + for i in `seq 1 10000`; do touch 10000_files/$i; done && I just happened to notice these while reading your range diff; git discourages the use of seq in test, instead preferring our own works-everywhere 'test_seq()'. I was wondering how this slipped through since it should be checked automatically by t/check-non-portable-shell.pl, but that is only run from t/Makefile, not t/perf/Makefile. That probably explains how a few raw `seq`'s made it into t/perf. In either case, test_seq() is preferred here. Thanks, Taylor
