On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:21 PM Derrick Stolee <sto...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 10/5/2019 5:12 PM, brian m. carlson wrote: > > Adjust the test so that it computes variables for object IDs instead of > > using hard-coded hashes. > > [snip] > > > @@ -137,14 +141,17 @@ test_expect_success SYMLINKS 'setup symlinks with > > attributes' ' > > ' > > > > test_expect_success SYMLINKS 'symlinks do not respect userdiff config by > > path' ' > > - cat >expect <<-\EOF && > > + file=$(git rev-parse --short $(git hash-object file.bin)) && > > + link=$(git rev-parse --short \ > > + $(printf file.bin | git hash-object --stdin)) && > > Why this change from $(git hash-object file.bin) to > $(printf file.bin | git hash-object --stdin)?
thats two different things. The first hashes the content of file "file.bin". The second hashes the literal string "file.bin". To avoid this confusion, may I suggest to use 'printf "%s" "file.bin"', so that it is clear, that the literal string is meant in this context? Bert > > For that matter, why are you using the "printf|git hash-object" > pattern throughout your change? Seems like an unnecessary hurdle > to me. > > -Stolee
