On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Santiago Torres <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 09:07:25AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 03:59:46AM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
>> > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Jeff King <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > In fact, I suspect you could replace the "GOODSIG" check as well by
>> > > doing something like:
>> > >
>> > > tags="fourth-signed sixth-signed seventh-signed"
>> > > for i in $tags; do
>> > > git verify-tag -v --raw $i || return 1
>> > > done >expect.stdout 2>expect.stderr &&
>> > > git verify-tag -v --raw $tags >actual.stdout 2>actual.stderr &&
>> > > test_cmp expect.stdout actual.stdout &&
>> > > test_cmp expect.stderr actual.stderr
>> >
>> > Hmm, does [1] suggest that using test_cmp on stderr here would be
>> > contraindicated?
>> >
>> > [1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/289077
>>
>> It does, but I am not sure I agree with the advice in that email in the
>> general case (I like making "-x" work, too, but not at the cost of
>> making the tests harder to read and write). In this case, I suppose you
>> could grep for gpg raw-output on stderr, though, and compare only that.
>
> I just read [1], I'll take the later advice and use test_i18ngrep
> instead.
I think Peff meant that a simple grep would suffice; no need for
test_i18ngrep. In other words (reproducing Peff's example), something
like this:
tags="fourth-signed sixth-signed seventh-signed" &&
for i in $tags; do
git verify-tag -v --raw $i || return 1
done >expect.stdout 2>expect.stderr.1 &&
grep GOODSIG <expect.stderr.1 >expect.stderr &&
git verify-tag -v --raw $tags >actual.stdout 2>actual.stderr.1 &&
grep GOODSIG <actual.stderr.1 >actual.stderr &&
test_cmp expect.stdout actual.stdout &&
test_cmp expect.stderr actual.stderr
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
