Hi Phillip, > `test -e <path>` checks whether <path> exists and exits 0 if it does and > the shell treats an exit code of 0 as success. `!` inverts the > success/failure of the command that follows it. Using that and looking > at the definition of test_file_is_missing in t/test-lib-functions.sh see > if you can fix the conversion so that the tests pass. Thank you, that makes sense, now the test cases with `! test -e` replaced with `test_path_is_missing paginated.out` all pass. Sending PATCH v2 next. Thank you for your help, Joey ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Tuesday, October 20, 2020 6:19 AM, Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Joey > > On 20/10/2020 08:24, Joey S wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > Thank you very much for the input and feedback, it's much appreciated. > > > > > All this text above is useful context for reviewers but appears as part > > > of the commit message which is not what you want. If you add notes after > > > the `---` line below then they will not end up in the commit message. > > > > Understood, thank you. > > > > > > Modernized the test by replacing 'test -e' instances with > > > > test_path_is_file helper functions. > > > > > > s/Modernized/Modernize/ > > > Will do in the amended commit next. > > > > > > - ! test_path_is_file paginated.out > > > > > > It would be better to replace`! test -e` this with > > > `test_path_is_missing` as the modified test will pass if paginated.out > > > exists but is not a file. `test_path_is_missing` will print an > > > appropriate diagnostic message as well. > > > > Thank you for the explanation : ) > > After replacing `! test -e` with `! test_path_is_missing paginated.out` however, the changed test cases are failing; > > > > $ cd t/ && prove t7006-pager.sht7006-pager.sh .. Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) > > Failed 3/101 subtests > > > > Test Summary Report > > ------------------- > > t7006-pager.sh (Wstat: 256 Tests: 101 Failed: 3) > > Failed tests: 7-9 > > Non-zero exit status: 1 > > Files=1, Tests=101, 5 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 3.49 cusr 0.65 csys = 4.17 CPU) > > Result: FAIL > > > > > > Is this the behavior I should be expecting? > > No it's not! As one aspect of this process is to help candidates improve > their understanding I'll give you a hint rather than the whole answer. > `test -e <path>` checks whether <path> exists and exits 0 if it does and > the shell treats an exit code of 0 as success. `!` inverts the > success/failure of the command that follows it. Using that and looking > at the definition of test_file_is_missing in t/test-lib-functions.sh see > if you can fix the conversion so that the tests pass. If you get stuck > do let me know and I'll try and help some more. > > Best Wishes > > Phillip > > > > ...Alternatively, this would fit just fine in a cover letter. Usually > > > cover letters are not necessary for single patches (where the patch > > > message itself conveys the full message, or a little bit of additional > > > context below the triple-dash line is all that's necessary to clarify > > > the intent). But, if you want to introduce yourself, a 0/1 cover letter > > > is fine, too. > > > > Will keep this in mind, thank you Taylor. > > > > > > One thing missed by other commenters: the Developer's Certificate of > > > > Origin line - which is what this indicates - should have your "full > > > > name". > > > > > > ... and it must match the authorship. > > > > Changed, thank you both for catching that. > > Thank you all, > > Joey > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > > On Monday, October 19, 2020 7:59 PM, Junio C Hamano gitster@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > Emily Shaffer emilyshaffer@xxxxxxxxxx writes: > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:26:07AM +0000, Joey S wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > Hi Joey and welcome. > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: JoeyS jgsal@xxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > > One thing missed by other commenters: the Developer's Certificate of > > > > Origin line - which is what this indicates - should have your "full > > > > name". > > > > > > ... and it must match the authorship. > > > > > > > So in my case, I sign my patches 'Emily Shaffer > > > > emilyshaffer@xxxxxxxxxx'. If I'm wrong that's fine, but JoeyS sounds > > > > like a name and initial rather than a full name. > > > > > > Thanks for pointing it out. > > > If somebody from the "mentoring" group is taking a tally, it might > > > not be a bad idea to identify which style and procedure rules are > > > often failed to be followed by new contributors so that we can > > > figure out ways to make them stand out in our documentation set > > > (e.g. Documentation/SubmittingPatches but maybe a separate cheat > > > sheet might be worth having). > > > Thanks.
