Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 01:37:39PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > diff --git a/t/t1300-repo-config.sh b/t/t1300-repo-config.sh >> > index c9c426c..3e3f77b 100755 >> > --- a/t/t1300-repo-config.sh >> > +++ b/t/t1300-repo-config.sh >> > @@ -974,24 +974,15 @@ test_expect_success SYMLINKS 'symlinked >> > configuration' ' >> > ' >> > >> > test_expect_success 'nonexistent configuration' ' >> > - ( >> > - GIT_CONFIG=doesnotexist && >> > - export GIT_CONFIG && >> > - test_must_fail git config --list && >> > - test_must_fail git config test.xyzzy >> > - ) >> > + test_must_fail env GIT_CONFIG=doesnotexist git config --list && >> > + test_must_fail env GIT_CONFIG=doesnotexist git config test.xyzzy >> > ' > > Isn't GIT_CONFIG here another way of saying: > > test_must_fail git config -f doesnotexist --list > > Perhaps that is shorter and more readable still (and there are a few > similar cases in this patch.
Surely, but are we assuming that "git config" correctly honors the equivalence between GIT_CONFIG=file and -f file, or is that also something we are testing in these tests? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
