There were some uses of 'say' inside test_expect_success. But if the tests
were not run in verbose mode, this message went to /dev/null. Pull them out
of test_expect_success.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Some tests report that some tests will be skipped. They used
'test_expect_success' with a trivially successful test. Nowadays we have
the helper function 'say' for this purpose.
In on case, 'say_color skip' is replaced by 'say' because the former is
not intended as a public API.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
We cleaned up lockfiles upon receiving the usual suspects HUP, TERM, QUIT
but a wicked user could kill us of asphyxiation by piping our output to a
pipe that does not read. Protect ourselves by catching SIGPIPE and clean
up the lockfiles as well in such a case.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This uses the extended index flag mechanism introduced earlier to mark
the entries added to the index via "git add -N" with CE_INTENT_TO_ADD.
The logic to detect an "intent to add" entry for the purpose of allowing
"git rm --cached $path" is tightened to check not just for a staged empty
blob, but with the CE_INTENT_TO_ADD bit. This protects an empty blob that
was explicitly added and then modified in the work tree from being dropped
with this sequence:
$ >empty
$ git add empty
$ echo "non empty" >empty
$ git rm --cached empty
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If a file is different between the working tree copy, the index, and the
HEAD, then we do not allow it to be deleted without --force.
However, this is overly tight in the face of "git add --intent-to-add":
$ git add --intent-to-add file
$ : oops, I don't actually want to stage that yet
$ git rm --cached file
error: 'empty' has staged content different from both the
file and the HEAD (use -f to force removal)
$ git rm -f --cached file
Unfortunately, there is currently no way to distinguish between an empty
file that has been added and an "intent to add" file. The ideal behavior
would be to disallow the former while allowing the latter.
This patch loosens the safety valve to allow the deletion only if we are
deleting the cached entry and the cached content is empty. This covers
the intent-to-add situation, and assumes there is little harm in not
protecting users who have legitimately added an empty file. In many
cases, the file will still be empty, in which case the safety valve does
not trigger anyway (since the content remains untouched in the working
tree). Otherwise, we do remove the fact that no content was staged, but
given that the content is by definition empty, it is not terribly
difficult for a user to recreate it.
However, we still document the desired behavior in the form of two
tests. One checks the correct removal of an intent-to-add file. The other
checks that we still disallow removal of empty files, but is marked as
expect_failure to indicate this compromise. If the intent-to-add feature
is ever extended to differentiate between normal empty files and
intent-to-add files, then the safety valve can be re-tightened.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since "git rm" is supposed to be porcelain, we should convince it to
be user friendly by refreshing the index itself.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
* maint:
GIT 1.5.6.4
builtin-rm: fix index lock file path
http-fetch: do not SEGV after fetching a bad pack idx file
rev-list: honor --quiet option
api-run-command.txt: typofix
When hold_locked_index() is called with a relative git_dir and you are
outside the work tree, the lock file become relative to the current
directory. So when later setup_work_tree() change the current directory
it breaks lock file path and commit_locked_index() fails.
This patch move index locking code after setup_work_tree() call to make
lock file relative to the working tree as it should be and add a test
case.
Noticed by Nick Andrew.
Signed-off-by: Olivier Marin <dkr@freesurf.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This patch changes every occurrence of "! git" -- with the meaning
that a git call has to gracefully fail -- into "test_must_fail git".
This is useful to
- make sure the test does not fail because of a signal,
e.g. SIGSEGV, and
- advertise the use of "test_must_fail" for new tests.
Signed-off-by: Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Originally, test_expect_failure was designed to be the opposite
of test_expect_success, but this was a bad decision. Most tests
run a series of commands that leads to the single command that
needs to be tested, like this:
test_expect_{success,failure} 'test title' '
setup1 &&
setup2 &&
setup3 &&
what is to be tested
'
And expecting a failure exit from the whole sequence misses the
point of writing tests. Your setup$N that are supposed to
succeed may have failed without even reaching what you are
trying to test. The only valid use of test_expect_failure is to
check a trivial single command that is expected to fail, which
is a minority in tests of Porcelain-ish commands.
This large-ish patch rewrites all uses of test_expect_failure to
use test_expect_success and rewrites the condition of what is
tested, like this:
test_expect_success 'test title' '
setup1 &&
setup2 &&
setup3 &&
! this command should fail
'
test_expect_failure is redefined to serve as a reminder that
that test *should* succeed but due to a known breakage in git it
currently does not pass. So if git-foo command should create a
file 'bar' but you discovered a bug that it doesn't, you can
write a test like this:
test_expect_failure 'git-foo should create bar' '
rm -f bar &&
git foo &&
test -f bar
'
This construct acts similar to test_expect_success, but instead
of reporting "ok/FAIL" like test_expect_success does, the
outcome is reported as "FIXED/still broken".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There is nothing _wrong_ with egrep per se, but this way we
would have less dependency on external tools.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the previous behavior, "git-rm --cached" (without -f) had the same
restriction as "git-rm". This forced the user to use the -f flag in
situations which weren't actually dangerous, like:
$ git add foo # oops, I didn't want this
$ git rm --cached foo # back to initial situation
Previously, the index had to match the file *and* the HEAD. With
--cached, the index must now match the file *or* the HEAD. The behavior
without --cached is unchanged, but provides better error messages.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Moved the setup commands into test_expect_success blocks so their
output is hidden unless -v is used. This makes the test suite look
a little cleaner when the rm test-file setup step fails (and was
expected to fail for most cases).
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
When running t3600-rm test under fakeroot (or as root), we
cannot make a file unremovable with "chmod a-w .". Detect this
case early and skip that test.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
New tests are added to the git-rm test case to cover this as well.
Signed-off-by: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This adds a git-rm command which provides convenience similar to
git-add, (and a bit more since it takes care of the rm as well if
given -f).
Like git-add, git-rm expands the given path names through
git-ls-files. This means it only acts on files listed in the
index. And it does act recursively on directories by default, (no -r
needed as in the case of rm itself). When it recurses, it does not
remove empty directories that are left behind.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
