Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > test_expect_success 'stash save --include-untracked stashed the untracked files' ' > + tracked=$(git rev-parse --short $(echo 1 | git hash-object --stdin)) && > + untracked=$(git rev-parse --short $(echo untracked | git hash-object --stdin)) && Not a new issue introduced by this patch, but * these will fail if blobs that record "1\n" and "untracked\n" do not exist in the repository already, because the hash-object command lacks the "-w" option. * the reason why they do not fail is because there are these blobs already; grabbing them using extended SHA-1 expression may be simpler to read, e.g. tracked=$(git rev-parse --short HEAD:file) * even if it is not trivial to get to such a blob object, it probably is easier to read the test if a file that has the desired contents in it is used, not an "echo", e.g. untracked=$(git rev-parse --short $(git hash-object -w untracked/untracked)) We may want to clean these up someday, but it does not have to be part of this topic (#leftoverbits). > + cat >expect.diff <<-EOF && > + diff --git a/HEAD b/HEAD > + new file mode 100644 > + index 0000000..$tracked > + --- /dev/null > + +++ b/HEAD > + @@ -0,0 +1 @@ > + +1 > + diff --git a/file2 b/file2 > + new file mode 100644 > + index 0000000..$tracked > + --- /dev/null > + +++ b/file2 > + @@ -0,0 +1 @@ > + +1 > + diff --git a/untracked/untracked b/untracked/untracked > + new file mode 100644 > + index 0000000..$untracked > + --- /dev/null > + +++ b/untracked/untracked > + @@ -0,0 +1 @@ > + +untracked > + EOF
