On 09/07/2012 01:08 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
>> From: Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu>
>> There is currently a bug: if passed an absolute top-level path that
>> doesn't exist (e.g., "/foo") it incorrectly interprets the path as a
>> relative path (e.g., returns "$(pwd)/foo"). So mark the test as
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu>
>> t/t0000-basic.sh | 12 +++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> diff --git a/t/t0000-basic.sh b/t/t0000-basic.sh
>> index 1a51634..ad002ee 100755
>> --- a/t/t0000-basic.sh
>> +++ b/t/t0000-basic.sh
>> @@ -458,7 +458,17 @@ test_expect_success 'real path rejects the empty
>> string' '
>> test_must_fail test-path-utils real_path ""
>> -test_expect_success SYMLINKS 'real path works as expected' '
>> +test_expect_failure 'real path works on absolute paths' '
>> + nopath="hopefully-absent-path" &&
>> + test "/" = "$(test-path-utils real_path "/")" &&
>> + test "/$nopath" = "$(test-path-utils real_path "/$nopath")" &&
> You could perhaps do
> sfx=0 &&
> while test -e "/$nopath$sfx"
> sfx=$(( $sfx + 1 ))
> done && nopath=$nopath$sfx &&
> test "/$nopath" = "$(test-path-utils real_path "/$nopath")" &&
> if you really cared.
The possibility is obvious. Are you advocating it?
I considered that approach, but came to the opinion that it would be
overkill that would only complicate the code for no real advantage,
given that (1) I picked a name that is pretty implausible for an
existing file, (2) the test suite only reads the file, never writes it
(so there is no risk that a copy from a previous run gets left behind),
(3) it's only test suite code, and any failures would have minor
Please let me know if you assess the situation differently.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html