Den Friday 07 March 2008 09.23.54 skrev Junio C Hamano: > Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg.lists@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Verify a few more commands and pathname variants. > > > > Signed-off-by: Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > t/t7010-setup.sh | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > These are a few testcases from my earlier attempt at this. The > > log and commit cases succeeded with Junios version, but not > > blame and some of the nastier versions for git add (same > > principle for all commands, just that I use add as an example) > > I am very sorry about replying to an ancient topic, but I think I misread > your patch. > > > +test_expect_failure 'add a directory outside the work tree' ' > > + d1="$(cd .. ; pwd)" && > > + git add "$d1" > > + echo $? > > +' > > What I think I misunderstood was that you _wanted_ this (after removing > the "echo", which was a mistake, which we already talked about) to fail. > Somehow I ended up committing test_expect_success, which I think was a > mistake, and I am asking for a sanity-check. Yes, it should fail, so according to your filosophy, the test should be reverted, i.e. ! git add "$d1 and that negated test should pass. > Likewise for the other two tests. These "add outside" should fail, right? > > > +test_expect_failure 'add a file outside the work tree, nasty case 1' '( > > + f="$(pwd)x" && > > + touch "$f" && > > + git add "$f" > > +)' > > + > > +test_expect_failure 'add a file outside the work tree, nasty case 2' '( > > + f="$(pwd|sed "s/.$//")x" && > > + touch "$f" && > > + git add "$f" > > +)' > > + > > test_done Yes. -- robin -- 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
