| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
Broken &&-chains in the test scripts have been corrected.
* es/test-chain-lint:
t6000-t9999: detect and signal failure within loop
t5000-t5999: detect and signal failure within loop
t4000-t4999: detect and signal failure within loop
t0000-t3999: detect and signal failure within loop
tests: simplify by dropping unnecessary `for` loops
tests: apply modern idiom for exiting loop upon failure
tests: apply modern idiom for signaling test failure
tests: fix broken &&-chains in `{...}` groups
tests: fix broken &&-chains in `$(...)` command substitutions
tests: fix broken &&-chains in compound statements
tests: use test_write_lines() to generate line-oriented output
tests: simplify construction of large blocks of text
t9107: use shell parameter expansion to avoid breaking &&-chain
t6300: make `%(raw:size) --shell` test more robust
t5516: drop unnecessary subshell and command invocation
t4202: clarify intent by creating expected content less cleverly
t1020: avoid aborting entire test script when one test fails
t1010: fix unnoticed failure on Windows
t/lib-pager: use sane_unset() to avoid breaking &&-chain
|
|
The top-level &&-chain checker built into t/test-lib.sh causes tests to
magically exit with code 117 if the &&-chain is broken. However, it has
the shortcoming that the magic does not work within `{...}` groups,
`(...)` subshells, `$(...)` substitutions, or within bodies of compound
statements, such as `if`, `for`, `while`, `case`, etc. `chainlint.sed`
partly fills in the gap by catching broken &&-chains in `(...)`
subshells, but bugs can still lurk behind broken &&-chains in the other
cases.
Fix broken &&-chains in compound statements in order to reduce the
number of possible lurking bugs.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Reviewed-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Mark some tests that match "*apply*" as passing when git is compiled
with SANITIZE=leak. They'll now be listed as running under the
"GIT_TEST_PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK=true" test mode (the "linux-leaks" CI
target).
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
When the preimage we are patching is shorter than what the patch
text expects, we tried to match the buffer contents at the
"original" line with the fragment in full, without checking we
have enough data to match in the preimage. This caused the size
of a later memmove() to wrap around and attempt to scribble
almost the entire address space. Not good.
The code that follows the part this patch touches tries to match
the fragment with line offsets. Curiously, that code does not
have the problem --- it guards against reading past the end of
the preimage.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
Junio C Hamano
Eric Sunshine
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason