On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 4:49 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:51 PM, Eric Sunshine
>> wrote:
>>> An alternative approach used elsewhere in the test
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> Sorry for the confusion. I meant "return 1" as used elsewhere in the
> test suite[1].
> [1]: For example, the "setup" test of t4151-am-abort.sh.
Additional context: e6821d09e4 (t: fix some trivial cases of ignored
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 4:49 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:51 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
>> An alternative approach used elsewhere in the test suite[1] would be
>> simply to 'exit' if test_cmp fails:
>>
>> for i in merge no-lf
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:51 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:38 AM, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
>> Unroll that for loop, so we can check the files' contents the usual
>> way and rely on 'test_cmp's exit code failing the && chain.
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:38 AM, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> The test 'cvs update (-p)' redirects and checks 'test_cmp's stdout and
> even its stderr. The commit introducing this test in 6e8937a084
> (cvsserver: Add test for update -p, 2008-03-27) doesn't discuss why,
> in fact
The test 'cvs update (-p)' redirects and checks 'test_cmp's stdout and
even its stderr. The commit introducing this test in 6e8937a084
(cvsserver: Add test for update -p, 2008-03-27) doesn't discuss why,
in fact its log message only consists of that subject line. Anyway,
weird as it is, it kind
6 matches
Mail list logo