Commit graph

9 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason d3c6751b18 tests: make use of the test_must_be_empty function
Change various tests that use an idiom of the form:

    >expect &&
    test_cmp expect actual

To instead use:

    test_must_be_empty actual

The test_must_be_empty() wrapper was introduced in ca8d148daf ("test:
test_must_be_empty helper", 2013-06-09). Many of these tests have been
added after that time. This was mostly found with, and manually pruned
from:

    git grep '^\s+>.*expect.* &&$' t

Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-30 11:18:41 -07:00
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ac3f5a3468 ref-filter: add --no-contains option to tag/branch/for-each-ref
Change the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands to have a --no-contains
option in addition to their longstanding --contains options.

This allows for finding the last-good rollout tag given a known-bad
<commit>. Given a hypothetically bad commit cf5c7253e0, the git
version to revert to can be found with this hacky two-liner:

    (git tag -l 'v[0-9]*'; git tag -l --contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*') |
        sort | uniq -c | grep -E '^ *1 ' | awk '{print $2}' | tail -n 10

With this new --no-contains option the same can be achieved with:

    git tag -l --no-contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*' | sort | tail -n 10

As the filtering machinery is shared between the tag, branch &
for-each-ref commands, implement this for those commands too. A
practical use for this with "branch" is e.g. finding branches which
were branched off between v2.8.0 and v2.10.0:

    git branch --contains v2.8.0 --no-contains v2.10.0

The "describe" command also has a --contains option, but its semantics
are unrelated to what tag/branch/for-each-ref use --contains for. A
--no-contains option for "describe" wouldn't make any sense, other
than being exactly equivalent to not supplying --contains at all,
which would be confusing at best.

Add a --without option to "tag" as an alias for --no-contains, for
consistency with --with and --contains.  The --with option is
undocumented, and possibly the only user of it is
Junio (<xmqqefy71iej.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>). But it's
trivial to support, so let's do that.

The additions to the the test suite are inverse copies of the
corresponding --contains tests. With this change --no-contains for
tag, branch & for-each-ref is just as well tested as the existing
--contains option.

In addition to those tests, add a test for "tag" which asserts that
--no-contains won't find tree/blob tags, which is slightly
unintuitive, but consistent with how --contains works & is documented.

Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-03-24 12:15:26 -07:00
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason b643827b94 ref-filter: add test for --contains on a non-commit
Change the tag test suite to test for --contains on a tree & blob. It
only accepts commits and will spew out "<object> is a tree, not a
commit".

It's sufficient to test this just for the "tag" and "branch" commands,
because it covers all the machinery shared between "branch" and
"for-each-ref".

Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-03-23 10:02:55 -07:00
Vasco Almeida 1edbaac3bb tests: use test_i18n* functions to suppress false positives
The test functions test_i18ncmp and test_i18ngrep pretend success if run
under GETTEXT_POISON. By using those functions to test output which is
correctly marked as translatable, enables one to detect if the strings
newly marked for translation are from plumbing output. If they are
indeed from plumbing, the test would fail, and the string should be
unmarked, since it is not seen by users.

Thus, it is productive to not have false positives when running the test
under GETTEXT_POISON. This commit replaces normal test functions by
their i18n aware variants in use-cases know to be correctly marked for
translation, suppressing false positives.

Signed-off-by: Vasco Almeida <vascomalmeida@sapo.pt>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-06-17 15:45:48 -07:00
Jeff King 8376a70441 branch: clean up commit flags after merge-filter walk
When we run `branch --merged`, we use prepare_revision_walk
with the merge-filter marked as UNINTERESTING. Any branch
tips that are marked UNINTERESTING after it returns must be
ancestors of that commit. As we iterate through the list of
refs to show, we check item->commit->object.flags to see
whether it was marked.

This interacts badly with --verbose, which will do a
separate walk to find the ahead/behind information for each
branch. There are two bad things that can happen:

  1. The ahead/behind walk may get the wrong results,
     because it can see a bogus UNINTERESTING flag leftover
     from the merge-filter walk.

  2. We may omit some branches if their tips are involved in
     the ahead/behind traversal of a branch shown earlier.
     The ahead/behind walk carefully cleans up its commit
     flags, meaning it may also erase the UNINTERESTING
     flag that we expect to check later.

We can solve this by moving the merge-filter state for each
ref into its "struct ref_item" as soon as we finish the
merge-filter walk. That fixes (2). Then we are free to clear
the commit flags we used in the walk, fixing (1).

Note that we actually do away with the matches_merge_filter
helper entirely here, and inline it between the revision
walk and the flag-clearing. This ensures that nobody
accidentally calls it at the wrong time (it is only safe to
check in that instant between the setting and clearing of
the global flag).

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2014-09-18 09:21:16 -07:00
Jeff King d040350813 branch: let branch filters imply --list
Currently, a branch filter like `--contains`, `--merged`, or
`--no-merged` is ignored when we are not in listing mode.
For example:

  git branch --contains=foo bar

will create the branch "bar" from the current HEAD, ignoring
the `--contains` argument entirely. This is not very
helpful. There are two reasonable behaviors for git here:

  1. Flag an error; the arguments do not make sense.

  2. Implicitly go into `--list` mode

This patch chooses the latter, as it is more convenient, and
there should not be any ambiguity with attempting to create
a branch; using `--contains` and not wanting to list is
nonsensical.

That leaves the case where an explicit modification option
like `-d` is given.  We already catch the case where
`--list` is given alongside `-d` and flag an error. With
this patch, we will also catch the use of `--contains` and
other filter options alongside `-d`.

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-01-31 16:37:24 -08:00
Lars Hjemli f9fd5210c8 Add tests for branch --[no-]merged
Signed-off-by: Lars Hjemli <hjemli@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-04-20 18:16:46 -07:00
Jeff King 82ebb0b6ec add test_cmp function for test scripts
Many scripts compare actual and expected output using
"diff -u". This is nicer than "cmp" because the output shows
how the two differ. However, not all versions of diff
understand -u, leading to unnecessary test failure.

This adds a test_cmp function to the test scripts and
switches all "diff -u" invocations to use it. The function
uses the contents of "$GIT_TEST_CMP" to compare its
arguments; the default is "diff -u".

On systems with a less-capable diff, you can do:

  GIT_TEST_CMP=cmp make test

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-03-13 00:57:52 -07:00
Junio C Hamano 3f7dfe77b7 git-branch --contains: doc and test
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-11-22 22:11:28 -08:00