1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git.git synced 2024-11-01 14:57:52 +01:00
Commit graph

4 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Nanako Shiraishi
3604e7c5c6 tests: use "git xyzzy" form (t3600 - t6999)
Converts tests between t3600-t6300.

Signed-off-by: Nanako Shiraishi <nanako3@lavabit.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-09-03 14:13:59 -07:00
Stephan Beyer
d492b31caf t/: Use "test_must_fail git" instead of "! git"
This patch changes every occurrence of "! git" -- with the meaning
that a git call has to gracefully fail -- into "test_must_fail git".

This is useful to

 - make sure the test does not fail because of a signal,
   e.g. SIGSEGV, and

 - advertise the use of "test_must_fail" for new tests.

Signed-off-by: Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-07-13 13:21:26 -07:00
Junio C Hamano
41ac414ea2 Sane use of test_expect_failure
Originally, test_expect_failure was designed to be the opposite
of test_expect_success, but this was a bad decision.  Most tests
run a series of commands that leads to the single command that
needs to be tested, like this:

    test_expect_{success,failure} 'test title' '
	setup1 &&
        setup2 &&
        setup3 &&
        what is to be tested
    '

And expecting a failure exit from the whole sequence misses the
point of writing tests.  Your setup$N that are supposed to
succeed may have failed without even reaching what you are
trying to test.  The only valid use of test_expect_failure is to
check a trivial single command that is expected to fail, which
is a minority in tests of Porcelain-ish commands.

This large-ish patch rewrites all uses of test_expect_failure to
use test_expect_success and rewrites the condition of what is
tested, like this:

    test_expect_success 'test title' '
	setup1 &&
        setup2 &&
        setup3 &&
        ! this command should fail
    '

test_expect_failure is redefined to serve as a reminder that
that test *should* succeed but due to a known breakage in git it
currently does not pass.  So if git-foo command should create a
file 'bar' but you discovered a bug that it doesn't, you can
write a test like this:

    test_expect_failure 'git-foo should create bar' '
        rm -f bar &&
        git foo &&
        test -f bar
    '

This construct acts similar to test_expect_success, but instead
of reporting "ok/FAIL" like test_expect_success does, the
outcome is reported as "FIXED/still broken".

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-02-01 20:49:34 -08:00
Johannes Sixt
4c324c0050 upload-pack: Use finish_{command,async}() instead of waitpid().
upload-pack spawns two processes, rev-list and pack-objects, and carefully
monitors their status so that it can report failure to the remote end.
This change removes the complicated procedures on the grounds of the
following observations:

- If everything is OK, rev-list closes its output pipe end, upon which
  pack-objects (which reads from the pipe) sees EOF and terminates itself,
  closing its output (and error) pipes. upload-pack reads from both until
  it sees EOF in both. It collects the exit codes of the child processes
  (which indicate success) and terminates successfully.

- If rev-list sees an error, it closes its output and terminates with
  failure. pack-objects sees EOF in its input and terminates successfully.
  Again upload-pack reads its inputs until EOF. When it now collects
  the exit codes of its child processes, it notices the failure of rev-list
  and signals failure to the remote end.

- If pack-objects sees an error, it terminates with failure. Since this
  breaks the pipe to rev-list, rev-list is killed with SIGPIPE.
  upload-pack reads its input until EOF, then collects the exit codes of
  the child processes, notices their failures, and signals failure to the
  remote end.

- If upload-pack itself dies unexpectedly, pack-objects is killed with
  SIGPIPE, and subsequently also rev-list.

The upshot of this is that precise monitoring of child processes is not
required because both terminate if either one of them dies unexpectedly.
This allows us to use finish_command() and finish_async() instead of
an explicit waitpid(2) call.

The change is smaller than it looks because most of it only reduces the
indentation of a large part of the inner loop.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@telecom.at>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-11-05 22:47:28 -08:00