In 66713e84e7 (tests: prepare aligned mentions of the default branch
name, 2020-10-23), we started that transition, trying to prepare for a
time when `git init` would use that name for the initial branch.
Even if that time has not arrived, we can complete the transition by
making the test script independent of the default branch name. This also
allows us to drop the `PREPARE_FOR_MAIN_BRANCH` prereq from one test
case.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In some tests, the default branch name is part of aligned output. As we
want to change the default branch name to `main`, which is two
characters shorter than the old default branch name, we will have to
adjust those tests.
Since we use the original default branch name until the entire test
suite has been adjusted accordingly, the touched test cases need to be
guarded by a prereq (that is so far disabled so that they are skipped
for now).
The test cases that depend on those test cases that are newly guarded by
that prereq naturally have to be guarded, too.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Enable ref-filter to process multiple merged and no-merged filters, and
extend functionality to git branch, git tag and git for-each-ref. This
provides an easy way to check for branches that are "graduation
candidates:"
$ git branch --no-merged master --merged next
If passed more than one merged (or more than one no-merged) filter, refs
must be reachable from any one of the merged commits, and reachable from
none of the no-merged commits.
Signed-off-by: Aaron Lipman <alipman88@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add tests covering the behavior of passing multiple contains/no-contains
filters to git branch, e.g.:
$ git branch --contains feature_a --contains feature_b
$ git branch --no-contains feature_a --no-contains feature_b
When passed more than one contains (or no-contains) filter, the tips of
the branches returned must be reachable from any of the contains commits
and from none of the the no-contains commits.
This logic is useful to describe prior to enabling multiple
merged/no-merged filters, so that future tests will demonstrate
consistent behavior between merged/no-merged and contains/no-contains
filters.
Signed-off-by: Aaron Lipman <alipman88@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Adjust the test so that it computes variables for object IDs instead of
using hard-coded hashes.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change various tests that use an idiom of the form:
>expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
To instead use:
test_must_be_empty actual
The test_must_be_empty() wrapper was introduced in ca8d148daf ("test:
test_must_be_empty helper", 2013-06-09). Many of these tests have been
added after that time. This was mostly found with, and manually pruned
from:
git grep '^\s+>.*expect.* &&$' t
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands to have a --no-contains
option in addition to their longstanding --contains options.
This allows for finding the last-good rollout tag given a known-bad
<commit>. Given a hypothetically bad commit cf5c7253e0, the git
version to revert to can be found with this hacky two-liner:
(git tag -l 'v[0-9]*'; git tag -l --contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*') |
sort | uniq -c | grep -E '^ *1 ' | awk '{print $2}' | tail -n 10
With this new --no-contains option the same can be achieved with:
git tag -l --no-contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*' | sort | tail -n 10
As the filtering machinery is shared between the tag, branch &
for-each-ref commands, implement this for those commands too. A
practical use for this with "branch" is e.g. finding branches which
were branched off between v2.8.0 and v2.10.0:
git branch --contains v2.8.0 --no-contains v2.10.0
The "describe" command also has a --contains option, but its semantics
are unrelated to what tag/branch/for-each-ref use --contains for. A
--no-contains option for "describe" wouldn't make any sense, other
than being exactly equivalent to not supplying --contains at all,
which would be confusing at best.
Add a --without option to "tag" as an alias for --no-contains, for
consistency with --with and --contains. The --with option is
undocumented, and possibly the only user of it is
Junio (<xmqqefy71iej.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>). But it's
trivial to support, so let's do that.
The additions to the the test suite are inverse copies of the
corresponding --contains tests. With this change --no-contains for
tag, branch & for-each-ref is just as well tested as the existing
--contains option.
In addition to those tests, add a test for "tag" which asserts that
--no-contains won't find tree/blob tags, which is slightly
unintuitive, but consistent with how --contains works & is documented.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Change the tag test suite to test for --contains on a tree & blob. It
only accepts commits and will spew out "<object> is a tree, not a
commit".
It's sufficient to test this just for the "tag" and "branch" commands,
because it covers all the machinery shared between "branch" and
"for-each-ref".
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The test functions test_i18ncmp and test_i18ngrep pretend success if run
under GETTEXT_POISON. By using those functions to test output which is
correctly marked as translatable, enables one to detect if the strings
newly marked for translation are from plumbing output. If they are
indeed from plumbing, the test would fail, and the string should be
unmarked, since it is not seen by users.
Thus, it is productive to not have false positives when running the test
under GETTEXT_POISON. This commit replaces normal test functions by
their i18n aware variants in use-cases know to be correctly marked for
translation, suppressing false positives.
Signed-off-by: Vasco Almeida <vascomalmeida@sapo.pt>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When we run `branch --merged`, we use prepare_revision_walk
with the merge-filter marked as UNINTERESTING. Any branch
tips that are marked UNINTERESTING after it returns must be
ancestors of that commit. As we iterate through the list of
refs to show, we check item->commit->object.flags to see
whether it was marked.
This interacts badly with --verbose, which will do a
separate walk to find the ahead/behind information for each
branch. There are two bad things that can happen:
1. The ahead/behind walk may get the wrong results,
because it can see a bogus UNINTERESTING flag leftover
from the merge-filter walk.
2. We may omit some branches if their tips are involved in
the ahead/behind traversal of a branch shown earlier.
The ahead/behind walk carefully cleans up its commit
flags, meaning it may also erase the UNINTERESTING
flag that we expect to check later.
We can solve this by moving the merge-filter state for each
ref into its "struct ref_item" as soon as we finish the
merge-filter walk. That fixes (2). Then we are free to clear
the commit flags we used in the walk, fixing (1).
Note that we actually do away with the matches_merge_filter
helper entirely here, and inline it between the revision
walk and the flag-clearing. This ensures that nobody
accidentally calls it at the wrong time (it is only safe to
check in that instant between the setting and clearing of
the global flag).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently, a branch filter like `--contains`, `--merged`, or
`--no-merged` is ignored when we are not in listing mode.
For example:
git branch --contains=foo bar
will create the branch "bar" from the current HEAD, ignoring
the `--contains` argument entirely. This is not very
helpful. There are two reasonable behaviors for git here:
1. Flag an error; the arguments do not make sense.
2. Implicitly go into `--list` mode
This patch chooses the latter, as it is more convenient, and
there should not be any ambiguity with attempting to create
a branch; using `--contains` and not wanting to list is
nonsensical.
That leaves the case where an explicit modification option
like `-d` is given. We already catch the case where
`--list` is given alongside `-d` and flag an error. With
this patch, we will also catch the use of `--contains` and
other filter options alongside `-d`.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Many scripts compare actual and expected output using
"diff -u". This is nicer than "cmp" because the output shows
how the two differ. However, not all versions of diff
understand -u, leading to unnecessary test failure.
This adds a test_cmp function to the test scripts and
switches all "diff -u" invocations to use it. The function
uses the contents of "$GIT_TEST_CMP" to compare its
arguments; the default is "diff -u".
On systems with a less-capable diff, you can do:
GIT_TEST_CMP=cmp make test
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
