Re: in 2.19.2 t0061-run-command FAILs if . is in $PATH
Hi Merijn and Junio, On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > -test_expect_success 'run_command is restricted to PATH' ' > > +test_lazy_prereq DOT_IN_PATH ' > > + case ":$PATH:" in > > + *:.:*) true;; > > + *) false;; > > + esac > > +' > > An empty element in the colon-separated list also serves as an > instruction to pick up executable from $cwd, so > > case ":$PATH:" in > *:.:** | *::*) true ;; > *) false ;; > esac > > perhaps. Good point. Merijn, please be sure to squash this fix in before you submit the final thing. Thanks, Johannes > > > +test_expect_success !DOT_IN_PATH 'run_command is restricted to PATH' ' > > write_script should-not-run <<-\EOF && > > echo yikes > > EOF > > -- snap -- > > > > If so, can you please provide a commit message for it (you can add my > > Signed-off-by: line and your Tested-by: line). > > > > Thanks, > > Johannes >
Re: in 2.19.2 t0061-run-command FAILs if . is in $PATH
Johannes Schindelin writes: > -test_expect_success 'run_command is restricted to PATH' ' > +test_lazy_prereq DOT_IN_PATH ' > + case ":$PATH:" in > + *:.:*) true;; > + *) false;; > + esac > +' An empty element in the colon-separated list also serves as an instruction to pick up executable from $cwd, so case ":$PATH:" in *:.:** | *::*) true ;; *) false ;; esac perhaps. > +test_expect_success !DOT_IN_PATH 'run_command is restricted to PATH' ' > write_script should-not-run <<-\EOF && > echo yikes > EOF > -- snap -- > > If so, can you please provide a commit message for it (you can add my > Signed-off-by: line and your Tested-by: line). > > Thanks, > Johannes
Re: in 2.19.2 t0061-run-command FAILs if . is in $PATH
Hi, On Wed, 28 Nov 2018, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > the test is explicitely checking that it should not find runnable > scripts outside $PATH, *assuming* $PATH does not have . in it Does this fix it for you? -- snip -- diff --git a/t/t0061-run-command.sh b/t/t0061-run-command.sh index f3f308920f04..4949fdfde88b 100755 --- a/t/t0061-run-command.sh +++ b/t/t0061-run-command.sh @@ -33,7 +33,14 @@ test_expect_success 'run_command can run a command' ' test_must_be_empty err ' -test_expect_success 'run_command is restricted to PATH' ' +test_lazy_prereq DOT_IN_PATH ' + case ":$PATH:" in + *:.:*) true;; + *) false;; + esac +' + +test_expect_success !DOT_IN_PATH 'run_command is restricted to PATH' ' write_script should-not-run <<-\EOF && echo yikes EOF -- snap -- If so, can you please provide a commit message for it (you can add my Signed-off-by: line and your Tested-by: line). Thanks, Johannes > > Having '.' in $PATH can be seen as a bad idea (and it most likely is), > but the tests should either remove '.' from $PATH before testing or > ignore that fail if $PATH does have '.', as it is not illegal > > $ git-2.19.2/t 504 > prove -v t0061-run-command.sh > t0061-run-command.sh .. > ok 1 - start_command reports ENOENT (slash) > ok 2 - start_command reports ENOENT (no slash) > ok 3 - run_command can run a command > ok 4 - run_command is restricted to PATH > ok 5 - run_command can run a script without a #! line > ok 6 - run_command does not try to execute a directory > ok 7 - run_command passes over non-executable file > ok 8 - run_command reports EACCES > ok 9 - unreadable directory in PATH > ok 10 - run_command runs in parallel with more jobs available than tasks > ok 11 - run_command runs in parallel with as many jobs as tasks > ok 12 - run_command runs in parallel with more tasks than jobs available > ok 13 - run_command is asked to abort gracefully > ok 14 - run_command outputs > ok 15 - GIT_TRACE with environment variables > # passed all 15 test(s) > 1..15 > ok > All tests successful. > Files=1, Tests=15, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr 0.01 sys + 0.26 cusr 0.07 > csys = 0.38 CPU) > Result: PASS > > $ env PATH="$PATH"":." prove -v t0061-run-command.sh > t0061-run-command.sh .. > ok 1 - start_command reports ENOENT (slash) > ok 2 - start_command reports ENOENT (no slash) > ok 3 - run_command can run a command > not ok 4 - run_command is restricted to PATH > # > # write_script should-not-run <<-\EOF && > # echo yikes > # EOF > # test_must_fail test-tool run-command run-command > should-not-run > # > ok 5 - run_command can run a script without a #! line > ok 6 - run_command does not try to execute a directory > ok 7 - run_command passes over non-executable file > ok 8 - run_command reports EACCES > ok 9 - unreadable directory in PATH > ok 10 - run_command runs in parallel with more jobs available than tasks > ok 11 - run_command runs in parallel with as many jobs as tasks > ok 12 - run_command runs in parallel with more tasks than jobs available > ok 13 - run_command is asked to abort gracefully > ok 14 - run_command outputs > ok 15 - GIT_TRACE with environment variables > # failed 1 among 15 test(s) > 1..15 > Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) > Failed 1/15 subtests > > Test Summary Report > --- > t0061-run-command.sh (Wstat: 256 Tests: 15 Failed: 1) > Failed test: 4 > Non-zero exit status: 1 > Files=1, Tests=15, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.24 cusr 0.07 > csys = 0.34 CPU) > Result: FAIL > > -- > H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ > using perl5.00307 .. 5.29 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and openSUSE > http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/http://www.test-smoke.org/ > http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ >
in 2.19.2 t0061-run-command FAILs if . is in $PATH
the test is explicitely checking that it should not find runnable scripts outside $PATH, *assuming* $PATH does not have . in it Having '.' in $PATH can be seen as a bad idea (and it most likely is), but the tests should either remove '.' from $PATH before testing or ignore that fail if $PATH does have '.', as it is not illegal $ git-2.19.2/t 504 > prove -v t0061-run-command.sh t0061-run-command.sh .. ok 1 - start_command reports ENOENT (slash) ok 2 - start_command reports ENOENT (no slash) ok 3 - run_command can run a command ok 4 - run_command is restricted to PATH ok 5 - run_command can run a script without a #! line ok 6 - run_command does not try to execute a directory ok 7 - run_command passes over non-executable file ok 8 - run_command reports EACCES ok 9 - unreadable directory in PATH ok 10 - run_command runs in parallel with more jobs available than tasks ok 11 - run_command runs in parallel with as many jobs as tasks ok 12 - run_command runs in parallel with more tasks than jobs available ok 13 - run_command is asked to abort gracefully ok 14 - run_command outputs ok 15 - GIT_TRACE with environment variables # passed all 15 test(s) 1..15 ok All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=15, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr 0.01 sys + 0.26 cusr 0.07 csys = 0.38 CPU) Result: PASS $ env PATH="$PATH"":." prove -v t0061-run-command.sh t0061-run-command.sh .. ok 1 - start_command reports ENOENT (slash) ok 2 - start_command reports ENOENT (no slash) ok 3 - run_command can run a command not ok 4 - run_command is restricted to PATH # # write_script should-not-run <<-\EOF && # echo yikes # EOF # test_must_fail test-tool run-command run-command should-not-run # ok 5 - run_command can run a script without a #! line ok 6 - run_command does not try to execute a directory ok 7 - run_command passes over non-executable file ok 8 - run_command reports EACCES ok 9 - unreadable directory in PATH ok 10 - run_command runs in parallel with more jobs available than tasks ok 11 - run_command runs in parallel with as many jobs as tasks ok 12 - run_command runs in parallel with more tasks than jobs available ok 13 - run_command is asked to abort gracefully ok 14 - run_command outputs ok 15 - GIT_TRACE with environment variables # failed 1 among 15 test(s) 1..15 Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) Failed 1/15 subtests Test Summary Report --- t0061-run-command.sh (Wstat: 256 Tests: 15 Failed: 1) Failed test: 4 Non-zero exit status: 1 Files=1, Tests=15, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.24 cusr 0.07 csys = 0.34 CPU) Result: FAIL -- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using perl5.00307 .. 5.29 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and openSUSE http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ pgpSlesgyXBek.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
