David Turner <dtur...@twopensource.com> writes: > On Tue, 2014-07-01 at 06:16 +0200, Torsten Bögershausen wrote: >> diff --git a/t/t0090-cache-tree.sh b/t/t0090-cache-tree.sh >> index 6c33e28..7c60675 100755 >> --- a/t/t0090-cache-tree.sh >> +++ b/t/t0090-cache-tree.sh >> @@ -85,9 +85,22 @@ test_expect_success 'reset --hard without index gives >> cache-tree' ' >> test_shallow_cache_tree >> ' >> >> -test_expect_failure 'checkout gives cache-tree' ' >> +test_expect_success 'checkout gives cache-tree' ' >> + git tag current >> git checkout HEAD^ && >> test_shallow_cache_tree >> >> The && chainis broken here. >> Does the test now pass, because "git tag" is added ? > > The tag does not cause the cache-tree to be created, so git tag does not > cause the test to pass.
That does not explain why it is a good idea to declare success of this test if this new "git tag current" fails here for whatever reason (e.g. somebody updated "git tag" for a reason that is completely unrelated to cache-tree and made it segfault without creating the "current" tag). -- 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
