Hi Junio, On 2015-06-17 19:33, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: > >> +test_expect_failure 'rebase --continue removes CHERRY_PICK_HEAD' ' >> + git checkout -b commit-to-skip && >> + for double in X 3 1 >> + do >> + seq 5 | sed "s/$double/&&/" >seq && >> + git add seq && >> + test_tick && >> + git commit -m seq-$double >> + done && >> + git tag seq-onto && >> + git reset --hard HEAD~2 && >> + git cherry-pick seq-onto && >> + test_must_fail git rebase -i seq-onto && > > Shouldn't this explicitly specify what fake editor is to be used, > instead of relying on whatever the last test happened to have used? > > I thought this deserved to go to older maintenance track, but the > fake editor that was used last are different between branches, so > "rebase -i" fails for a wrong reason (i.e. cannot spawn the editor) > when queued on say maint-2.2.
True. Thanks for pointing that out. Will be fixed in v2. >> + test -d .git/rebase-merge && >> + git rebase --continue && >> + git diff seq-onto && > > I am puzzled with this "diff"; what is this about? Is it a remnant > from an earlier debugging session, or is it making sure seq-onto is > a valid tree-ish? The idea is to verify that we end up with the same tree even if we exchanged the latest two patches. I can remove it if you want as it is not strictly necessary, but I would like to keep it just to make sure that we did not end up with an incomplete rebase. Ciao, Dscho -- 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
