On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Sudhanshu Shekhar
<sudshekha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Add following test cases:
>
> 1) Confirm error message when git reset is used with no previous branch
> 2) Confirm git reset - works like git reset @{-1}
> 3) Confirm "-" is always treated as a commit unless the -- file option is
> specified
> 4) Confirm "git reset -" works normally even when a file named @{-1} is
> present
Does it concern you that all new tests pass except the last one even
when patch 1/2 is not applied? I would have expected most or all of
these tests to fail without patch 1/2.
> Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com>
> Helped-by: Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr>
> Helped-by: David Aguilar <dav...@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudshekha...@gmail.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/t/t7102-reset.sh b/t/t7102-reset.sh
> index 98bcfe2..d3a5874 100755
> --- a/t/t7102-reset.sh
> +++ b/t/t7102-reset.sh
> @@ -568,4 +568,163 @@ test_expect_success 'reset --mixed sets up work tree' '
> test_cmp expect actual
> '
>
> +test_expect_success 'reset - with no previous branch fails' '
> + git init no_previous &&
I understand the intention of the name "no_previous" in tests for
which there is no @{-1}, however...
> + test_when_finished rm -rf no_previous &&
> + (
> + cd no_previous &&
> + test_must_fail git reset - 2>actual
> + ) &&
> + test_i18ngrep "bad flag" no_previous/actual
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'reset - while having file named - and no previous
> branch fails' '
> + git init no_previous &&
> + test_when_finished rm -rf no_previous &&
> + (
> + cd no_previous &&
> + >- &&
> + test_must_fail git reset - 2>actual
> + ) &&
> + test_i18ngrep "bad flag" no_previous/actual
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success \
> + 'reset - in the presence of file named - with previous branch resets
> commit' '
> + cat >expect <<-\EOF
> + Unstaged changes after reset:
> + M -
> + M file
> + EOF &&
> + git init no_previous &&
I don't understand the name "no_previous" in tests for which @{-1} can
resolve. It probably would be better to choose a more generic name and
use it for all these tests. For instance, "resetdash" or just "dash"
or something better.
> + test_when_finished rm -rf no_previous &&
> + (
> + cd no_previous &&
> + >- &&
> + >file &&
> + git add file - &&
> + git commit -m "add base files" &&
> + git checkout -b new_branch &&
> + echo "random" >- &&
> + echo "wow" >file &&
> + git add file - &&
> + git reset - >../actual
> + ) &&
> + test_cmp expect actual
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'reset - with file named @{-1} succeeds' '
I may be missing something obvious, but why is it necessary to single
out a file named @{-1} at all, particuarly when there are so many
other ways to specify revisions, and there may be files mirroring
those spellings, as well?
> + cat >expect <<EOF
> + Unstaged changes after reset:
> + M file
> + M @{-1}
> + EOF &&
> + git init no_previous &&
> + test_when_finished rm -rf no_previous &&
> + (
> + cd no_previous &&
> + echo "random" >@{-1} &&
> + echo "random" >file &&
> + git add @{-1} file &&
> + git commit -m "base commit" &&
> + git checkout -b new_branch &&
> + echo "additional stuff" >>file &&
> + echo "additional stuff" >>@{-1} &&
> + git add file @{-1} &&
> + git reset - >../actual
> + ) &&
> + test_cmp expect actual
> +'
> +
> test_done
> --
> 2.3.1.278.ge5c7b1f.dirty
--
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
