summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/t/t2008-checkout-subdir.sh
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2021-11-18checkout: fix "branch info" memory leaksLibravatar Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason1-0/+1
The "checkout" command is one of the main sources of leaks in the test suite, let's fix the common ones by not leaking from the "struct branch_info". Doing this is rather straightforward, albeit verbose, we need to xstrdup() constant strings going into the struct, and free() the ones we clobber as we go along. This also means that we can delete previous partial leak fixes in this area, i.e. the "path_to_free" accounting added by 96ec7b1e708 (Convert resolve_ref+xstrdup to new resolve_refdup function, 2011-12-13). There was some discussion about whether "we should retain the "const char *" here and cast at free() time, or have it be a "char *". Since this is not a public API with any sort of API boundary let's use "char *", as is already being done for the "refname" member of the same struct. The tests to mark as passing were found with: rm .prove; GIT_SKIP_TESTS=t0027 prove -j8 --state=save t[0-9]*.sh :: --immediate # apply & compile this change prove -j8 --state=failed :: --immediate I.e. the ones that were newly passing when the --state=failed command was run. I left out "t3040-subprojects-basic.sh" and "t4131-apply-fake-ancestor.sh" to to optimization-level related differences similar to the ones noted in[1], except that these would be something the current 'linux-leaks' job would run into. 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover-v3-0.6-00000000000-20211022T175227Z-avarab@gmail.com/ Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-10-09checkout test: enable test with complex relative pathLibravatar Stefan Beller1-7/+7
This test was added, commented out, in fed1b5ca (git-checkout: Test for relative path use, 2007-11-09). Later git's path handling was improved (d089ebaa, setup: sanitize absolute and funny paths in get_pathspec(), 2008-01-28) but we forgot to enable the now-working test. This test expects to run from a subdirectory, so add a 'cd'. While we're here, examine the content of the checked-out file instead of just checking that it exists. The other checkout tests already do the same. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <stefanbeller@googlemail.com> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
2008-02-29tests: introduce test_must_failLibravatar Junio C Hamano1-4/+4
When we expect a git command to notice and signal errors, we carelessly wrote in our tests: test_expect_success 'reject bogus request' ' do something && do something else && ! git command ' but a non-zero exit could come from the "git command" segfaulting. A new helper function "tset_must_fail" is introduced and it is meant to be used to make sure the command gracefully fails (iow, dying and exiting with non zero status is counted as a failure to "gracefully fail"). The above example should be written as: test_expect_success 'reject bogus request' ' do something && do something else && test_must_fail git command ' Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-02-01Sane use of test_expect_failureLibravatar Junio C Hamano1-8/+8
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>
2007-11-11git-checkout: Test for relative path use.Libravatar David Symonds1-0/+82
Signed-off-by: David Symonds <dsymonds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>