summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/t/t5401-update-hooks.sh
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2020-11-19t5[0-4]*: adjust the references to the default branch name "main"Johannes Schindelin
Carefully excluding t5310, which is developed independently of the current patch series at the time of writing, we now use `main` as default branch in t5[0-4]*. This trick was performed via $ (cd t && sed -i -e 's/master/main/g' -e 's/MASTER/MAIN/g' \ -e 's/Master/Main/g' -- t5[0-4]*.sh && git checkout HEAD -- t5310\*) This allows us to define `GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=main` for those tests. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-27Merge branch 'sg/test-must-be-empty'Junio C Hamano
Test fixes. * sg/test-must-be-empty: tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of 'test_cmp <empty> <out>' tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of 'test_cmp /dev/null <out>' tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of 'test ! -s' tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of '! test -s'
2018-08-21tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of '! test -s'SZEDER Gábor
Using 'test_must_be_empty' is preferable to '! test -s', because it gives a helpful error message if the given file is unexpectedly not empty, while the latter remains completely silent. Furthermore, it also catches cases when the given file unexpectedly does not exist at all. This patch was basically created by: sed -i -e 's/! test -s/test_must_be_empty/' t[0-9]*.sh with the following notable exceptions: - The '! test -s' check in '.gitmodules ignore=dirty suppresses submodules with untracked content' in 't7508-status.sh' is left as-is, because it's bogus and, therefore, it's subject of a dedicated patch. - The '! test -s' checks in 't9131-git-svn-empty-symlink.sh' and 't9135-git-svn-moved-branch-empty-file.sh' are immediately preceeded by a 'test -f' to ensure that the files exist in the first place. 'test_must_be_empty' ensures that as well, so those 'test -f' commands are removed as well. Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-16t5000-t5999: fix broken &&-chainsEric Sunshine
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2014-09-16receive-pack: allow hooks to ignore its standard input streamJunio C Hamano
The pre-receive and post-receive hooks were designed to be an improvement over old style update and post-update hooks, which take the update information on their command line and are limited by the command line length limit. The same information is fed from the standard input to pre/post-receive hooks instead to lift this limitation. It has been mandatory for these new style hooks to consume the update information fully from the standard input stream. Otherwise, they would risk killing the receive-pack process via SIGPIPE. If a hook does not want to look at all the information, it is easy to send its standard input to /dev/null (perhaps a niche use of hook might need to know only the fact that a push was made, without having to know what objects have been pushed to update which refs), and this has already been done by existing hooks that are written carefully. However, because there is no good way to consistently fail hooks that do not consume the input fully (a small push may result in a short update record that may fit within the pipe buffer, to which the receive-pack process may manage to write before the hook has a chance to exit without reading anything, which will not result in a death-by-SIGPIPE of receive-pack), it can lead to a hard to diagnose "once in a blue moon" phantom failure. Lift this "hooks must consume their input fully" mandate. A mandate that is not enforced strictly is not helping us to catch mistakes in hooks. If a hook has a good reason to decide the outcome of its operation without reading the information we feed it, let it do so as it pleases. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-02-10receive-pack: Send internal errors over side-band #2Shawn O. Pearce
If the client has requested side-band-64k capability, send any of the internal error or warning messages in the muxed side-band stream using the same band as our hook output, band #2. By putting everything in one stream we ensure all messages are processed by the side-band demuxer, avoiding interleaving between our own stderr and the side-band demuxer's stderr buffers. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-02-10t5401: Use a bare repository for the remote peerShawn O. Pearce
We want to avoid the warnings (or later, test failures) about updating the current branch. It was never my intention to have this test deal with a repository with a working directory, and it is a very old bug that the test even used a non-bare repository for the remote side of the push operations. This fixes the interleaved output error we were seeing as a test failure by avoiding the giant warning message we were getting back about updating the current branch being risky. Its not a real fix, but is something we should do no matter what, because the behavior will change in the future to reject, and the test would break at that time. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-02-06receive-pack: Send hook output over side band #2Shawn O. Pearce
If the client requests to enable side-band-64k capability we can safely send any hook stdout or stderr data down side band #2, so the client can present it to the user. If side-band-64k isn't enabled, hooks continue to inherit stderr from the parent receive-pack process. When the side band channel is being used the push client will wind up prefixing all server messages with "remote: ", just like fetch does, so our test vector has to be updated with the new expected output. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-09-03tests: use "git xyzzy" form (t3600 - t6999)Nanako Shiraishi
Converts tests between t3600-t6300. Signed-off-by: Nanako Shiraishi <nanako3@lavabit.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-07-13t/: Use "test_must_fail git" instead of "! git"Stephan Beyer
This patch changes every occurrence of "! git" -- with the meaning that a git call has to gracefully fail -- into "test_must_fail git". This is useful to - make sure the test does not fail because of a signal, e.g. SIGSEGV, and - advertise the use of "test_must_fail" for new tests. Signed-off-by: Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-05-24tests: do not use implicit "git diff --no-index"Junio C Hamano
As a general principle, we should not use "git diff" to validate the results of what git command that is being tested has done. We would not know if we are testing the command in question, or locating a bug in the cute hack of "git diff --no-index". Rather use test_cmp for that purpose. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-02-02Sane use of test_expect_failureJunio C Hamano
Originally, test_expect_failure was designed to be the opposite of test_expect_success, but this was a bad decision. Most tests run a series of commands that leads to the single command that needs to be tested, like this: test_expect_{success,failure} 'test title' ' setup1 && setup2 && setup3 && what is to be tested ' And expecting a failure exit from the whole sequence misses the point of writing tests. Your setup$N that are supposed to succeed may have failed without even reaching what you are trying to test. The only valid use of test_expect_failure is to check a trivial single command that is expected to fail, which is a minority in tests of Porcelain-ish commands. This large-ish patch rewrites all uses of test_expect_failure to use test_expect_success and rewrites the condition of what is tested, like this: test_expect_success 'test title' ' setup1 && setup2 && setup3 && ! this command should fail ' test_expect_failure is redefined to serve as a reminder that that test *should* succeed but due to a known breakage in git it currently does not pass. So if git-foo command should create a file 'bar' but you discovered a bug that it doesn't, you can write a test like this: test_expect_failure 'git-foo should create bar' ' rm -f bar && git foo && test -f bar ' This construct acts similar to test_expect_success, but instead of reporting "ok/FAIL" like test_expect_success does, the outcome is reported as "FIXED/still broken". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-01-31Use 'printf %s $x' notation in t5401Shawn O. Pearce
We only care about getting what should be an empty string and sending it to a file, without a trailing LF, so the empty string translates into a 0 byte file. Earlier when I originally wrote these lines Mac OS X allowed the format string of printf to be the empty string, but more recent versions appear to have been 'improved' with error messages if the format is not given. This may cause problems if we ever wind up with changes to the hook tests. A minor cleanup makes the test more safe on all systems, by conforming to accepted printf conventions. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-01-05t/t{3600,3800,5401}: do not use egrep when grep would doJunio C Hamano
There is nothing _wrong_ with egrep per se, but this way we would have less dependency on external tools. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-07-03Rewrite "git-frotz" to "git frotz"Junio C Hamano
This uses the remove-dashes target to replace "git-frotz" to "git frotz". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-03-12Change {pre,post}-receive hooks to use stdinShawn O. Pearce
Sergey Vlasov, Andy Parkins and Alex Riesen all pointed out that it is possible for a single invocation of receive-pack to be given more refs than the OS might allow us to pass as command line parameters to a single hook invocation. We don't want to break these up into multiple invocations (like xargs might do) as that makes it impossible for the pre-receive hook to verify multiple related ref updates occur at the same time, and it makes it harder for post-receive to send out a single batch notification. Instead we pass the reference data on a pipe connected to the hook's stdin, supplying one ref per line to the hook. This way a single hook invocation can obtain an infinite amount of ref data, without bumping into any operating system limits. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-03-11Merge branch 'js/diff-ni'Junio C Hamano
* js/diff-ni: Get rid of the dependency to GNU diff in the tests diff --no-index: support /dev/null as filename diff-ni: fix the diff with standard input diff: support reading a file from stdin via "-"
2007-03-07Teach receive-pack to run pre-receive/post-receive hooksShawn O. Pearce
Bill Lear pointed out that it is easy to send out notifications of changes with the update hook, but successful execution of the update hook does not necessarily mean that the ref was actually updated. Lock contention on the ref or being unable to append to the reflog may prevent the ref from being changed. Sending out notifications prior to the ref actually changing is very misleading. To help this situation I am introducing two new hooks to the receive-pack flow: pre-receive and post-receive. These new hooks are invoked only once per receive-pack execution and are passed three arguments per ref (refname, old-sha1, new-sha1). The new post-receive hook is ideal for sending out notifications, as it has the complete list of all refnames that were successfully updated as well as the old and new SHA-1 values. This allows more interesting notifications to be sent. Multiple ref updates could be easily summarized into one email, for example. The new pre-receive hook is ideal for logging update attempts, as it is run only once for the entire receive-pack operation. It can also be used to verify multiple updates happen at once, e.g. an update to the `maint` head must also be accompained by a new annotated tag. Lots of documentation improvements for receive-pack are included in this change, as we want to make sure the new hooks are clearly explained. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-03-04Get rid of the dependency to GNU diff in the testsJohannes Schindelin
Now that "git diff" handles stdin and relative paths outside the working tree correctly, we can convert all instances of "diff -u" to "git diff". This commit is really the result of $ perl -pi.bak -e 's/diff -u/git diff/' $(git grep -l "diff -u" t/) Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> (cherry picked from commit c699a40d68215c7e44a5b26117a35c8a56fbd387)
2007-01-16Replace "echo -n" with printf in shell scripts.Jason Riedy
Not all echos know -n. This was causing a test failure in t5401-update-hooks.sh, but not t3800-mktag.sh for some reason. Signed-off-by: Jason Riedy <ejr@cs.berkeley.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-31Add test case for update hooks in receive-pack.Shawn O. Pearce
Verify that the update hooks work as documented/advertised. This is a simple set of tests to check that the update hooks run with the parameters expected, have their STDOUT and STDERR redirected to the client side of the connection, and that their STDIN does not contain any data (as its actually /dev/null). Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>