Thomas Rast schrieb:
+test_expect_success 'object with bad sha1' '
+ sha=$(echo blob | git hash-object -w --stdin) &&
+ echo $sha &&
+ old=$(echo $sha | sed "s+^..+&/+") &&
+ new=$(dirname $old)/ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff &&
new=${old%/*}/ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff &&
+ sha="$(dirname $new)$(basename $new)"
sha=${new%/*}${new##*/} &&
note the '&&'!
+ mv .git/objects/$old .git/objects/$new &&
+ git update-index --add --cacheinfo 100644 $sha foo &&
+ tree=$(git write-tree) &&
+ cmt=$(echo bogus | git commit-tree $tree) &&
+ git update-ref refs/heads/bogus $cmt &&
+ (git fsck 2>out; true) &&
Any particular reason not to use
test_must_fail git fsck 2>out &&
here?
+ grep "$sha.*corrupt" out &&
+ rm -f .git/objects/$new &&
+ git update-ref -d refs/heads/bogus &&
+ git read-tree -u --reset HEAD
+'
Shouldn't the cleanup be outside the test_expect_success so that later
tests work even if this one fails? (Ditto for subsequent tests.)
+test_expect_success 'tag pointing to nonexistent' '
+ tag=$(git hash-object -t tag -w --stdin < invalid-tag) &&
+ echo $tag > .git/refs/tags/invalid &&
+ git fsck 2>&1 | tee out &&
test_must_fail git fsck > out 2>&1 &&
+ grep "missing commit ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff" out &&
...
+test_expect_success 'tag pointing to something else than its type' '
+ tag=$(git hash-object -t tag -w --stdin < wrong-tag) &&
+ echo $tag > .git/refs/tags/wrong &&
+ git fsck 2>&1 | tee out &&
test_must_fail git fsck > out 2>&1 &&
+ grep "Object.*is a blob, not a commit" out &&
...
-- Hannes
--
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
