On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 07:08:07PM +0100, Duy Nguyen wrote: > >> BTW can you apply this patch? This broken && chain made me think the >> problem was in the next test. It would have saved me lots of time if I >> saw this "BUG" line coming from the previous test. >> >> -- 8< -- >> Subject: [PATCH] t9300: fix broken && chain >> >> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> >> --- >> t/t9300-fast-import.sh | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/t/t9300-fast-import.sh b/t/t9300-fast-import.sh >> index e4d06accc4..e2a0ae4075 100755 >> --- a/t/t9300-fast-import.sh >> +++ b/t/t9300-fast-import.sh >> @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ test_expect_success 'B: accept branch name "TEMP_TAG"' ' >> INPUT_END >> >> test_when_finished "rm -f .git/TEMP_TAG >> - git gc >> + git gc && >> git prune" && > > The &&-chain is broken from the first command, too. It's "rm -f", which > is not that big a deal, but... > >> @@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ test_expect_success 'B: accept empty committer' ' >> INPUT_END >> >> test_when_finished "git update-ref -d refs/heads/empty-committer-1 >> - git gc >> + git gc && >> git prune" && > > Same here, but we probably care more about noticing update-ref failure.
Yes. I wasn't sure if that update-ref could fail but did not check since this was a side issue for me. -- Duy
