mirror of
https://github.com/git/git
synced 2024-08-24 18:26:02 +00:00
41ac414ea2
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>
87 lines
2.2 KiB
Bash
Executable file
87 lines
2.2 KiB
Bash
Executable file
#!/bin/sh
|
|
#
|
|
# Copyright (c) 2005 Amos Waterland
|
|
#
|
|
|
|
test_description='git rebase should not destroy author information
|
|
|
|
This test runs git rebase and checks that the author information is not lost.
|
|
'
|
|
. ./test-lib.sh
|
|
|
|
export GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL=bogus_email_address
|
|
|
|
test_expect_success \
|
|
'prepare repository with topic branches' \
|
|
'echo First > A &&
|
|
git update-index --add A &&
|
|
git-commit -m "Add A." &&
|
|
git checkout -b my-topic-branch &&
|
|
echo Second > B &&
|
|
git update-index --add B &&
|
|
git-commit -m "Add B." &&
|
|
git checkout -f master &&
|
|
echo Third >> A &&
|
|
git update-index A &&
|
|
git-commit -m "Modify A." &&
|
|
git checkout -b side my-topic-branch &&
|
|
echo Side >> C &&
|
|
git add C &&
|
|
git commit -m "Add C" &&
|
|
git checkout -b nonlinear my-topic-branch &&
|
|
echo Edit >> B &&
|
|
git add B &&
|
|
git commit -m "Modify B" &&
|
|
git merge side &&
|
|
git checkout -b upstream-merged-nonlinear &&
|
|
git merge master &&
|
|
git checkout -f my-topic-branch &&
|
|
git tag topic
|
|
'
|
|
|
|
test_expect_success 'rebase against master' '
|
|
git rebase master'
|
|
|
|
test_expect_success \
|
|
'the rebase operation should not have destroyed author information' \
|
|
'! git log | grep "Author:" | grep "<>"'
|
|
|
|
test_expect_success 'rebase after merge master' '
|
|
git reset --hard topic &&
|
|
git merge master &&
|
|
git rebase master &&
|
|
! git show | grep "^Merge:"
|
|
'
|
|
|
|
test_expect_success 'rebase of history with merges is linearized' '
|
|
git checkout nonlinear &&
|
|
test 4 = $(git rev-list master.. | wc -l) &&
|
|
git rebase master &&
|
|
test 3 = $(git rev-list master.. | wc -l)
|
|
'
|
|
|
|
test_expect_success \
|
|
'rebase of history with merges after upstream merge is linearized' '
|
|
git checkout upstream-merged-nonlinear &&
|
|
test 5 = $(git rev-list master.. | wc -l) &&
|
|
git rebase master &&
|
|
test 3 = $(git rev-list master.. | wc -l)
|
|
'
|
|
|
|
test_expect_success 'rebase a single mode change' '
|
|
git checkout master &&
|
|
echo 1 > X &&
|
|
git add X &&
|
|
test_tick &&
|
|
git commit -m prepare &&
|
|
git checkout -b modechange HEAD^ &&
|
|
echo 1 > X &&
|
|
git add X &&
|
|
chmod a+x A &&
|
|
test_tick &&
|
|
git commit -m modechange A X &&
|
|
GIT_TRACE=1 git rebase master
|
|
'
|
|
|
|
test_done
|