On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 3:07 PM Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/2/22 5:27 PM, Rudy Rigot via GitGitGadget wrote:> +UNTRACKED FILES AND STATUS SPEED > > +test_expect_success 'when core.untrackedCache true, and fsmonitor' ' > > + git config core.untrackedCache true && > > + git config core.fsmonitor true && > > + git status | sed "s/[0-9]\.[0-9][0-9]/X/g" >../actual && > > + test_cmp "$DATA/with_untrackedcache_with_fsmonitor" ../actual && > > + rm -fr ../actual > > +' > > + > > diff --git a/t/t7065/no_untrackedcache_no_fsmonitor b/t/t7065/no_untrackedcache_no_fsmonitor > > diff --git a/t/t7065/with_untrackedcache_no_fsmonitor b/t/t7065/with_untrackedcache_no_fsmonitor > > diff --git a/t/t7065/with_untrackedcache_with_fsmonitor b/t/t7065/with_untrackedcache_with_fsmonitor > > These files are small enough that I think I'd rather see them > be created in the test script. You can use this kind of syntax: > > cat >expect <<-\EOF > <file contents here> > EOF && > > and then the test is self-contained. This is particularly > helpful when a test fails due to some future change in this > message. I've been meaning to respond to say the exact same thing about using here-doc instead. Also, the new tests seem to have an oddball mixture of indentation using spaces and TAB. They should be using TAB only.
