On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 10:39:18PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> It is not so simple, it appears. If I add for reproducibility
> "test_tick" like this:
>
> commit () {
> test_tick &&
> echo $1 >file &&
> git commit -a -m $1 &&
> git tag $1
> }
Ah. I think what is happening is something like this:
- when we add 'four' as uninteresting, we mark its parents as
uninteresting in handle_commit
- we don't recursively follow all of its parents because we haven't
parsed them yet
- when we get to limit_list, we call mark_parents_uninteresting again.
But we have already marked four^ as uninteresting, and therefore we
do not recurse in marking
- we add the parents to the list, but they are not interesting, and
therefore we quit
The reason it works with test_tick is that it changes the order we deal
with the commits in limit_list. We deal with 'one' _after_ dealing with
the uninteresting parents, so we never bail with
everybody_uninteresting.
> +test_expect_failure 'one is ancestor of others and should not be shown' '
> +
> + git rev-list one --not four >result &&
> + >expect &&
> + diff -u expect result
> +
> +'
Hooray, test_expect_failure is used properly. But you are still
missing a test_done. :)
-Peff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
