Tweak the --topo/date-order test vector a bit and mark the author
dates of two commits (a2 and a3) earlier than their own committer
dates, making them much older than other commits that are made on
parallel branches to simulate the case where a long running topic
was rebased recently.
They will show up as recent in the --date-order output due to their
timestamps, but they appear a lot later in the --author-date-order
output, even though their committer timestamp says otherwise.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Introduce on_dates helper that is similar to on_committer_date but
also sets the author date, not just the committer date.
At this step, just set the same timestamp to the author date as the
committer date, as no test looks at author date yet.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "--date-order" output is a slight twist of "--topo-order" in
that commits from parallel histories are shown in their committer
date order without an attempt to clump commits from a single line
of history together like --topo-order does.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The on_committer_date helper in t/lib-t6000 is used in t6002 and
t6003 with timestamps on a single day within a single minute
(i.e. 1971-08-16 00:00) and the tests repeat this over and over.
The actual value of the timestamp, however, does not matter very
much; only their relative ordering does.
Introduce another helper to expand only the suffix of the timestamp
to a full timestamp to make the lines shorter, and use it in this
helper. Also, because all the commits in the test are made with
specific GIT_COMMITTER_DATE, stop unsetting it at the end of the
helper.
We'll be specifying the author timestamp to these test commits in a
later patch, which will be helped with this change.
Also remove a test that was commented-out from t6003; it used to
test a commit with the same parent listed twice, which was allowed
by mistake but was fixed long time ago.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The naming of this test library conflicted with the recommendation in
t/README's "Naming Tests" section.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Many test scripts assumed that they will start in a 'trash' subdirectory
that is a single level down from the t/ directory, and referred to their
test vector files by asking for files like "../t9999/expect". This will
break if we move the 'trash' subdirectory elsewhere.
To solve this, we earlier introduced "$TEST_DIRECTORY" so that they can
refer to t/ directory reliably. This finally makes all the tests use
it to refer to the outside environment.
With this patch, and a one-liner not included here (because it would
contradict with what Dscho really wants to do):
| diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
| index 70ea7e0..60e69e4 100644
| --- a/t/test-lib.sh
| +++ b/t/test-lib.sh
| @@ -485,7 +485,7 @@ fi
| . ../GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS
|
| # Test repository
| -test="trash directory"
| +test="trash directory/another level/yet another"
| rm -fr "$test" || {
| trap - exit
| echo >&5 "FATAL: Cannot prepare test area"
all the tests still pass, but we would want extra sets of eyeballs on this
type of change to really make sure.
[jc: with help from Stephan Beyer on http-push tests I do not run myself;
credits for locating silly quoting errors go to Olivier Marin.]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
These tests seem to mean checking the output with expected
result, but was not doing its handrolled test helper function.
Also fix the guard to workaround wc output that have whitespace
padding, which was broken but not exposed because the test was
not testing it ;-).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The recently we updated rev-list --topo-order to show the heads
in date order, but we had a test that expected to see the old
behaviour.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
As promised, this is the "big tool rename" patch. The primary differences
since 0.99.6 are:
(1) git-*-script are no more. The commands installed do not
have any such suffix so users do not have to remember if
something is implemented as a shell script or not.
(2) Many command names with 'cache' in them are renamed with
'index' if that is what they mean.
There are backward compatibility symblic links so that you and
Porcelains can keep using the old names, but the backward
compatibility support is expected to be removed in the near
future.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The Makefile in the test suite directory considers any file
matching t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh as the top-level test script
to be executed. Unfortunately this was not documented, and the
common test library, t6000-lib.sh was named to match that
pattern. This caused t6000-lib.sh to be called from Makefile as
the top-level program, causing it to leave t/sed.script file
behind. Rename it to t6000lib.sh to prevent this, and document
the naming convention a bit more clearly.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
When sed uses \n rather than ; as a separator (for BSD sed(1) compat),
it is cleaner to use a file directly, rather than an environment
variable containing \n characters.
This change changes t/t6000 write to sed.script directly and changes
the other tests to remove knowledge of sed.script.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This test case demonstrates a problem with --merge-order.
A
|
B
|\
C D
|/
E
|
F
git-rev-list --merge-order A B doesn't produce the expected output of
A
B
D
C
E
F
The problem is fixed by a subsequent patch.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Functions that are useful to other t6xxx testcases are moved into t6000-lib.sh
To use these functions in a test case, use a test-case pre-amble like:
. ./test-lib.sh
. ../t6000-lib.sh # t6xxx specific functions
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This patch removes an unnecessary sort from the t6001 testcase.
Sorts were previously necessary when testing non --merge-order cases
because the output order wasn't entirely deterministic unless commit
date was fixed.
However, commit dates are now fixed, so the need for a sort has
disappeared. So the sort has been removed.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This fix fixes a t/t6001 test case break that was hidden by a bug in the
test case infrastructure.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Junio discovered a problem where an actual test case break was hidden
because pipelines are not handled properly by the test infrastructure in
t6001.
This patch fixes the broken infrastructure (and demonstrates the break
explicitly).
A subsequent patch in this series will fix the test case so that it
doesn't fail.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This patch makes --merge-order produce the same list as git-rev-list
without --merge-order specified.
In particular, if the graph looks like this:
A
| B
|/
C
|
D
The both git-rev-list B ^A and git-rev-list --merge-order will produce B.
The unit tests have been changed to reflect the fact that the prune
points are now formally part of the start list that is used to perform
the --merge-order sort.
That is: git-rev-list --merge-order A ^D used to produce
= A
| C
It now produces:
^ A
| C
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Added a test case that shows that --merge-order doesn't produce the
correct result in the following case.
A
|
| B
|/
C
|
D
git-rev-list --merge-order A ^B should produce just A. Instead
it produces BCD.
A subsequent patch will fix this defect.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
git-rev-list --merge-order is omitting one of the roots when
displaying a merge containing two distinct roots.
A subsequent patch will fix the problem.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
1. --merge-order doesn't deal properly with a specified head that has no parent
* FAIL 11: head has no parent
2. --merge-order doesn't deal properly with arguments of the form
head ^head
* FAIL 30: head ^head --merge-order git-rev-list --merge-order
--show-breaks a3 ^a3
3. if one of the specified heads is reachable from the other, the
head gets printed twice and this causes problems for upcoming
versions of gitk. This is true for both --merge-order and non
--merge-order style of invocations.
* FAIL 24: one specified head reachable from another a4, c3, --merge-order
* FAIL 26: one specified head reachable from another a4, c3, no --merge-order
* FAIL 27: one specified head reachable from another c3, a4, no --merge-order
4. --merge-order aborts with commits that list the same parent twice...it should handle it more gracefully.
* no longer unit testable
5. broken interaction between --merge-order and --max-age
previously posted as:
"[PATCH 1/2] Test case that demonstrates problem with --merge-order, --max-age interaction"
* FAIL 23: --max-age=c3, --merge-order
Later patches in this patch set fix these problems.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This patch fixes three bugs in --merge-order support
* mark_ancestors_uninteresting was unnecessarily exponential which
caused a problem when a commit with no parents was merged near the
head of something like the linux kernel
* removed a spurious statement from find_base which wasn't
apparently causing problems now, but wasn't correct either.
* removed an unnecessarily strict check from find_base_for_list
that causes a problem if git-rev-list commit ^parent-of-commit
is specified.
* added some unit tests which were accidentally omitted from
original merge-order patch
The fix to mark_ancestors_uninteresting isn't an optimal fix - a full
graph scan will still be performed in this case even though it is
not strictly required. However, a full graph scan is linear
and still no worse than git-rev-list HEAD which runs in less than 2
seconds on a warm cache.
Signed-off-by: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Junio C Hamano