Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 1/11/2023 8:14 AM, ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget wrote: >> From: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@xxxxxxxxx> > >> Range-diff vs v2: > >> -+test_expect_success 'progress without tty' ' >> ++test_expect_success TTY 'progress without tty' ' > > I think this addition of the TTY prerequisite is not necessary... > >> +test_expect_success TTY 'progress without tty' ' >> + enlistment=progress2 && >> + >> + test_config -C to-clone uploadpack.allowfilter true && >> + test_config -C to-clone uploadpack.allowanysha1inwant true && >> + >> + GIT_PROGRESS_DELAY=0 scalar clone "file://$(pwd)/to-clone" "$enlistment" 2>stderr && >> + ! grep "Enumerating objects" stderr && >> + ! grep "Updating files" stderr && >> + cleanup_clone $enlistment >> +' > > ...because the test doesn't use the environment details for > mimicing a TTY. The point is that stderr is redirected to a > file and isatty(2) would report false. Yup, the prerequisite was uttering misleading. I may queue it with local tweaks, but if I forget please send in an update. Thanks. > I don't think this is worth a re-roll, though, so I'm happy > with this version. > > Thanks, > -Stolee
