On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 07:41:56PM -0500, Ben Peart wrote:
[]
> diff --git a/t/t0050-filesystem.sh b/t/t0050-filesystem.sh
> index b29d749bb7..219c96594c 100755
> --- a/t/t0050-filesystem.sh
> +++ b/t/t0050-filesystem.sh
> @@ -80,7 +80,17 @@ test_expect_success 'merge (case change)' '
> git merge topic
> '
>
> -
> +test_expect_success CASE_INSENSITIVE_FS 'add directory (with different
> case)' '
> + git reset --hard initial &&
> + mkdir -p dir1 &&
> + mkdir -p dir1/dir2 &&
> + touch dir1/dir2/a &&
> + touch dir1/dir2/b &&
> + git add dir1/dir2/a &&
> + git add dir1/DIR2/b &&
> + camel=$(git ls-files | grep dir2) &&
> + test $(echo "$camel" | wc -l) = 2
> +'
>
There is nothing wrong with with "wc -l", but:
a more new-style would probably use test_line_count() here.
My personal favorite would be to spell out what we expect and run a diff.
When it fails, we can see what fails, and the function would look
like this:
test_expect_success CASE_INSENSITIVE_FS 'add directory (with different case)' '
git reset --hard initial &&
mkdir -p dir1 &&
mkdir -p dir1/dir2 &&
touch dir1/dir2/a &&
touch dir1/dir2/b &&
git add dir1/dir2/a &&
git add dir1/DIR2/b &&
git ls-files | grep dir2 | sort >actual &&
cat >expected <<-\EOF &&
dir1/dir2/a
dir1/dir2/b
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
