On Tue, Apr 27 2021, Han-Wen Nienhuys via GitGitGadget wrote: > From: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > t/t7003-filter-branch.sh | 5 ++++- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh b/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh > index cf30055c88dd..e18a21895238 100755 > --- a/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh > +++ b/t/t7003-filter-branch.sh > @@ -396,7 +396,10 @@ test_expect_success '--prune-empty is able to prune entire branch' ' > git branch prune-entire B && > git filter-branch -f --prune-empty --index-filter "git update-index --remove A.t B.t" prune-entire && > test_must_fail git rev-parse refs/heads/prune-entire && > - test_must_fail git reflog exists refs/heads/prune-entire > + if test_have_prereq REFFILES > + then > + test_must_fail git reflog exists refs/heads/prune-entire > + fi > ' > > test_expect_success '--remap-to-ancestor with filename filters' ' Ditto chicken and egg, but isn't this conflating "we always write logs" v.s. reftable just behaving differently, i.e. shouldn't this be positively asserting that we have the log *for that branch* still after its deletion?
