> > diff --git a/t/t0602-reffiles-fsck.sh b/t/t0602-reffiles-fsck.sh > > new file mode 100755 > > index 0000000000..b2db58d2c6 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/t/t0602-reffiles-fsck.sh > > @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ > > +#!/bin/sh > > + > > +test_description='Test reffiles backend consistency check' > > + > > +GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=main > > +export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME > > +GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_REF_FORMAT=files > > +export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_REF_FORMAT > > + > > +. ./test-lib.sh > > Is this test suite intentionally not marked with > `TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true`? > No, I don't know this. I will add `TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true` and export this environment variable. > > + > > +test_expect_success 'ref name should be checked' ' > > + test_when_finished "rm -rf repo" && > > + git init repo && > > + branch_dir_prefix=.git/refs/heads && > > + tag_dir_prefix=.git/refs/tags && > > + ( > > + cd repo && > > + git commit --allow-empty -m initial && > > + git checkout -b branch-1 && > > + git tag tag-1 && > > + git commit --allow-empty -m second && > > + git checkout -b branch-2 && > > + git tag tag-2 && > > + git tag multi_hierarchy/tag-2 > > + ) && > > I don't quite get why you create several subshells only to cd into > `repo` in each of them. Isn't a single subshell sufficient for all of > those tests? If you want to delimit blocks, then you can simply add an > empty newline between them. > I just want to delimit, I will use newline in the next version. > > + ( > > + cd repo && > > + cp $branch_dir_prefix/branch-1 $branch_dir_prefix/.branch-1 && > > + test_must_fail git fsck 2>err && > > + cat >expect <<-EOF && > > + error: refs/heads/.branch-1: badRefName: invalid refname format > > + EOF > > + rm $branch_dir_prefix/.branch-1 && > > + test_cmp expect err > > + ) && > > + ( > > + cd repo && > > + cp $tag_dir_prefix/tag-1 $tag_dir_prefix/tag-1.lock && > > + test_must_fail git fsck 2>err && > > + cat >expect <<-EOF && > > + error: refs/tags/tag-1.lock: badRefName: invalid refname format > > + EOF > > + rm $tag_dir_prefix/tag-1.lock && > > + test_cmp expect err > > + ) && > > The other cases all make sense, but I don't think that a file ending > with ".lock" should be marked as having a "badRefName". It is expected > that concurrent writers may have such lock files. > > What could make sense is to eventually mark stale lock files older than > X amount of time as errors or warnings. But I'd think that this is > outside of the scope of this patch series. > If so, let us just ignore ".lock" situation at the moment. > Patrick
