From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3344EC77B7F for ; Wed, 3 May 2023 19:49:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229704AbjECTtw (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 May 2023 15:49:52 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33124 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230008AbjECTtv (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 May 2023 15:49:51 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x12a.google.com (mail-lf1-x12a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBA7E7AAD for ; Wed, 3 May 2023 12:49:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12a.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-4ec8148f73eso6487481e87.1 for ; Wed, 03 May 2023 12:49:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1683143388; x=1685735388; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sQnhfgsaak1oIY6R7PWjZvmrvBgyS/heQqBnG1O9VYU=; b=RF+yL4aQDD+hutXvn814OTHc9hzujJtmYU3kzD5UWspL2+S/zZtj8yEw72lalnZNTz gQ3E0CnQJoHRmcGVJQCxCMHAyTP27bpKanopILI5D83nX/oNWCtHH7IefV2d/U4g7H7c AoPwJDulYl2/8PsrHIUAH2HFzQo+sP6HS/GxQ35fgiCpZglXyzAek9Ffe+JzSMAThWwD mVgsET8J3et7k5/L4Vv1lK8GZZGGStXR1hcKeygxQeYav1mxe31xslz1GARlL3kIv+4h AfvpZMGeh85UZ7PrGf9ftb2MUKIEXlbFAMhBylX5lh7axoHoolJmxjyCEkZU5y15AxFz iEIw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683143388; x=1685735388; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=sQnhfgsaak1oIY6R7PWjZvmrvBgyS/heQqBnG1O9VYU=; b=H6dRDenx6OAPnBxaQPyK9SM3RHhNVrskd3SqLVwvxt37YoERjIzPfF6nIuQ7zPPzdf yKLHDUyraIZQXQNsjAQL1vubgIvYPmlxKqZTQ5PeiFYCxBCNWAWgUfuLHajOt0MofT6V gre1S6b4B5kr1/mx0sSErHN8bb8UkaS07cluq/ZyGyzLReCh/xS+Vlrt3fmyJNsfBr3L QwL+OwPvyQLk06nOPWG8bu/EESetwkxIXiyPHCVHqwqs82hDRyE5Ndu3akfC/R6HgCSH Tk9ie2tPj19eUarg4boAxmLZb4j1MdyWOSOqUOEoj/QRBNrYQB4TElvonCAGxDXCbrq2 ULrA== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDx7x1koyN+dW1EDaEjsSYgVgMqZ4oEK3Zx1Xmd/5+KY8Px43rCu KRxLkCdySJFTbzFJPGqi6VP/aXwZj3k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6sune5voLhybR8FXb5eGfgmR6iC8kr+fVuipzJwf7q4hn0iN0IzAAtW/8f+hP5thYp3tXJbA== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9106:0:b0:2a8:a859:b5c7 with SMTP id m6-20020a2e9106000000b002a8a859b5c7mr320839ljg.0.1683143387446; Wed, 03 May 2023 12:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from osv.localdomain ([89.175.180.246]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t22-20020a2e9d16000000b002ab59a09d75sm2553825lji.120.2023.05.03.12.49.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 03 May 2023 12:49:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Sergey Organov To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] t4013: add expected failure for "log --patch --no-patch" References: <20230503134118.73504-1-sorganov@gmail.com> <874jote2zl.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Date: Wed, 03 May 2023 22:49:46 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Wed, 03 May 2023 11:07:20 -0700") Message-ID: <87ttwtci05.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Sergey Organov writes: > >> No problem from my side, but are you sure? > > Absolutely. > > I've seen people just say "we document a failed one" and leave it at > that, without attempting to fix. I am trying to see if pushing back > at first would serve as a good way to encourage these known failure > to be fixed, without accumulating too many expect_failure in our > test suite, which will waste cycles at CI runs (which do not need to > be reminded something is known to be broken). I will try not to do > this when I do not positively know the author of such a patch is > capable enough to provide a fix, though, and you are unlucky enough > to have shown your abilities in the past ;-) Thanks for the credit, but as my recent attempts to fix 2 obvious deficiencies in Git CI (one of them being my own) failed quite miserably, I figure I have no idea how these things in CI are to be treated, so I prefer to leave a fix to somebody else, who actually groks what makes sense in the Git UI, and what doesn't. That said, in case you still need the test with expect_success, below is one rerolled. Thanks, -- Sergey Organov --- >8 --- Subject: [PATCH] t4013: add test for "log --patch --no-patch" --patch followed by --no-patch is to be a no-op according to the "git log" manual page. In reality this sequence breaks --raw output though (and who knows what else?) Add test case for the issue. Signed-off-by: Sergey Organov --- t/t4013-diff-various.sh | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t4013-diff-various.sh b/t/t4013-diff-various.sh index 5de1d190759f..32907bf142fc 100755 --- a/t/t4013-diff-various.sh +++ b/t/t4013-diff-various.sh @@ -457,6 +457,17 @@ diff-tree --stat --compact-summary initial mode diff-tree -R --stat --compact-summary initial mode EOF +# This should succeed as --patch followed by --no-patch sequence is to +# be a no-op according to the manual page. In reality it breaks --raw +# though. Needs to be fixed. +test_expect_success '--no-patch cancels --patch only' ' + git log --raw master >result && + process_diffs result >expected && + git log --patch --no-patch --raw >result && + process_diffs result >actual && + test_cmp expected actual +' + test_expect_success 'log -m matches pure log' ' git log master >result && process_diffs result >expected && -- 2.25.1