Tanay Abhra <tanay...@gmail.com> writes:

> +test_expect_success 'check line errors for malformed values' '
> +     mv .git/config .git/config.old &&
> +     test_when_finished "mv .git/config.old .git/config" &&
> +     cat >.git/config <<-\EOF &&
> +     [alias]
> +             br
> +     EOF
> +     test_expect_code 128 git br 2>result &&
> +     grep "fatal: bad config file line 2 in .git/config" result
> +'

This is PATCH 4, and it tests a bug fixed in PATCH 1. It would have
eased review to group both patches, either

PATCH 1: introduce test_expect_failure test to demonstrate the failure
PATCH 2: fix the bug and change test_expect_failure to test_expect_success

Or putting both in the same patch.

I think the series is OK like this, my comment is just to be read as
"next time, here's how to do better".

Matthieu Moy
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

Reply via email to