| Message ID | 20200507010746.83418-1-carenas@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | t/t0000-basic: make sure subtests also use TEST_SHELL_PATH | expand |
On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 06:07:46PM -0700, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón wrote: > 3f824e91c8 (t/Makefile: introduce TEST_SHELL_PATH, 2017-12-08) allows for > setting a shell for running the tests, but the generated subtests weren't > updated. Yeah, this makes sense. The primary benefit of $TEST_SHELL_PATH was to get better support for special testing options (like using bash's trace_fd with "-x"). But based on recent patches I guess you were wanting to test the behavior of an unusual shell. And if we're testing how the test framework runs, certainly using TEST_SHELL_PATH is the most sensible thing. -Peff
diff --git a/t/t0000-basic.sh b/t/t0000-basic.sh index 3e440c078d..272f75ce63 100755 --- a/t/t0000-basic.sh +++ b/t/t0000-basic.sh @@ -77,9 +77,7 @@ _run_sub_test_lib_test_common () { # the sub-test. sane_unset HARNESS_ACTIVE && cd "$name" && - cat >"$name.sh" <<-EOF && - #!$SHELL_PATH - + write_script "$name.sh" "$TEST_SHELL_PATH" <<-EOF && test_description='$descr (run in sub test-lib) This is run in a sub test-lib so that we do not get incorrect @@ -94,7 +92,6 @@ _run_sub_test_lib_test_common () { . "\$TEST_DIRECTORY"/test-lib.sh EOF cat >>"$name.sh" && - chmod +x "$name.sh" && export TEST_DIRECTORY && TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY=$(pwd) && export TEST_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY && @@ -102,7 +99,7 @@ _run_sub_test_lib_test_common () { then ./"$name.sh" "$@" >out 2>err else - ! ./"$name.sh" "$@" >out 2>err + ! ./"$name.sh" "$@" >out 2>err fi ) }
3f824e91c8 (t/Makefile: introduce TEST_SHELL_PATH, 2017-12-08) allows for setting a shell for running the tests, but the generated subtests weren't updated. Correct that and while at it update it to use write_script. Signed-off-by: Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@gmail.com> --- t/t0000-basic.sh | 7 ++----- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)