Re: [PATCH 2/4] test: due not pass T380.1 for the wrong reasons

Subject:Re: [PATCH 2/4] test: due not pass T380.1 for the wrong reasons

Date:Thu, 10 Feb 2022 11:08:04 +0100

To:Tomi Ollila ,notmuch@notmuchmail.org

Cc:

From:Michael J Gruber


Tomi Ollila venit, vidit, dixit 2022-02-09 21:49:18:
> On Wed, Feb 09 2022, Michael J. Gruber wrote:
> 
> > If gdb is missing then some files are never written to so that the
> > comparisons of non-existing files succeeds for the wrong reason,
> > claiming that `notmch new` is idempotent when it was in fact never run.
> >
> > Catch this and (for lack of a better spot) set up the files with a
> > reason for the FAIL.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@grubix.eu>
> > ---
> >  test/T380-atomicity.sh | 4 ++++
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/test/T380-atomicity.sh b/test/T380-atomicity.sh
> > index a6f1e037..7f618062 100755
> > --- a/test/T380-atomicity.sh
> > +++ b/test/T380-atomicity.sh
> > @@ -90,6 +90,10 @@ if test_require_external_prereq gdb; then
> >           i=$(expr $end - 1)
> >       fi
> >      done
> > +else
> > +    echo -n "Test fails due to missing gdb." > searchall
> > +    echo -n > expectall
> 
> I am not much of a fan of 'echo -n' (I remember seeing -n (and newline
> echoed...), therefore first to use printf and second : > expectall
> (unless printf '' > expectall)

I'm in favour of using printf - usually I don't impose my favours but
follow surrounding style, which is exactly what I did here. In the
if-block before the else, the files are writen to using "echo -n". I
would be weird to do it differently in both blocks.

> 
> > +    outcount=0
> >  fi
> >  
> >  test_begin_subtest '"notmuch new" is idempotent under arbitrary aborts'
> > -- 
> > 2.35.1.306.ga00bde9711
_______________________________________________
notmuch mailing list -- notmuch@notmuchmail.org
To unsubscribe send an email to notmuch-leave@notmuchmail.org

Thread: