| Message ID | 52501623f6b47447ce5da283ec11e378413899b7.1561986710.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | t3420 remove progress from output | expand |
"Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes: > progress output before comparing it to the expected output. We do this > by removing everything before the final "\r" on each line as we don't > care about the progress indicator, but we do care about what is printed > immediately after it. As long as sed implementation used here does not do anything funny to CR, I think the approach to strip everything before the last CR on the line is sensible. As I am not familiar with how Windows port of sed wants to treat a CR byte in the pattern, I am not sure about the precondition of the above statement, though. I also have to wonder if we can/want to do this without an extra printf process every time we sanitize the output, though I do not think I care too deeply about it. > Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> > --- > t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh | 16 +++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh b/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh > index 9186e90127..0454018584 100755 > --- a/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh > +++ b/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh > @@ -48,8 +48,8 @@ create_expected_success_interactive () { > q_to_cr >expected <<-EOF > $(grep "^Created autostash: [0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*\$" actual) > HEAD is now at $(git rev-parse --short feature-branch) third commit > - Rebasing (1/2)QRebasing (2/2)QApplied autostash. > - Q QSuccessfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. > + Applied autostash. > + Successfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. > EOF > } > > @@ -67,13 +67,13 @@ create_expected_failure_am () { > } > > create_expected_failure_interactive () { > - q_to_cr >expected <<-EOF > + cat >expected <<-EOF > $(grep "^Created autostash: [0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*\$" actual) > HEAD is now at $(git rev-parse --short feature-branch) third commit > - Rebasing (1/2)QRebasing (2/2)QApplying autostash resulted in conflicts. > + Applying autostash resulted in conflicts. > Your changes are safe in the stash. > You can run "git stash pop" or "git stash drop" at any time. > - Q QSuccessfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. > + Successfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. > EOF > } > > @@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ testrebase () { > suffix=interactive > fi && > create_expected_success_$suffix && > - test_i18ncmp expected actual > + sed "$(printf "s/.*\\r//")" <actual >actual2 && > + test_i18ncmp expected actual2 > ' > > test_expect_success "rebase$type: dirty index, non-conflicting rebase" ' > @@ -209,7 +210,8 @@ testrebase () { > suffix=interactive > fi && > create_expected_failure_$suffix && > - test_i18ncmp expected actual > + sed "$(printf "s/.*\\r//")" <actual >actual2 && > + test_i18ncmp expected actual2 > ' > }
On 01/07/2019 22:01, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes: > >> progress output before comparing it to the expected output. We do this >> by removing everything before the final "\r" on each line as we don't >> care about the progress indicator, but we do care about what is printed >> immediately after it. > > As long as sed implementation used here does not do anything funny > to CR, I think the approach to strip everything before the last CR > on the line is sensible. As I am not familiar with how Windows port > of sed wants to treat a CR byte in the pattern, I am not sure about > the precondition of the above statement, though. I wondered about that too, but it passes the CI tests under windows. > I also have to wonder if we can/want to do this without an extra > printf process every time we sanitize the output, though I do not > think I care too deeply about it. I could add 're="$(printf ...)"' to the setup at the top of the file if you want Best Wishes Phillip >> Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> >> --- >> t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh | 16 +++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh b/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh >> index 9186e90127..0454018584 100755 >> --- a/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh >> +++ b/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh >> @@ -48,8 +48,8 @@ create_expected_success_interactive () { >> q_to_cr >expected <<-EOF >> $(grep "^Created autostash: [0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*\$" actual) >> HEAD is now at $(git rev-parse --short feature-branch) third commit >> - Rebasing (1/2)QRebasing (2/2)QApplied autostash. >> - Q QSuccessfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. >> + Applied autostash. >> + Successfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. >> EOF >> } >> >> @@ -67,13 +67,13 @@ create_expected_failure_am () { >> } >> >> create_expected_failure_interactive () { >> - q_to_cr >expected <<-EOF >> + cat >expected <<-EOF >> $(grep "^Created autostash: [0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*\$" actual) >> HEAD is now at $(git rev-parse --short feature-branch) third commit >> - Rebasing (1/2)QRebasing (2/2)QApplying autostash resulted in conflicts. >> + Applying autostash resulted in conflicts. >> Your changes are safe in the stash. >> You can run "git stash pop" or "git stash drop" at any time. >> - Q QSuccessfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. >> + Successfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. >> EOF >> } >> >> @@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ testrebase () { >> suffix=interactive >> fi && >> create_expected_success_$suffix && >> - test_i18ncmp expected actual >> + sed "$(printf "s/.*\\r//")" <actual >actual2 && >> + test_i18ncmp expected actual2 >> ' >> >> test_expect_success "rebase$type: dirty index, non-conflicting rebase" ' >> @@ -209,7 +210,8 @@ testrebase () { >> suffix=interactive >> fi && >> create_expected_failure_$suffix && >> - test_i18ncmp expected actual >> + sed "$(printf "s/.*\\r//")" <actual >actual2 && >> + test_i18ncmp expected actual2 >> ' >> }
Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes: >> As long as sed implementation used here does not do anything funny >> to CR, I think the approach to strip everything before the last CR >> on the line is sensible. As I am not familiar with how Windows port >> of sed wants to treat a CR byte in the pattern, I am not sure about >> the precondition of the above statement, though. > > I wondered about that too, but it passes the CI tests under windows. Hopefully Git for Windows, MinGW, and CygWin would all behave similarly. >> I also have to wonder if we can/want to do this without an extra >> printf process every time we sanitize the output, though I do not >> think I care too deeply about it. > > I could add 're="$(printf ...)"' to the setup at the top of the file > if you want As I do not care too deeply about it, we recently saw a lot about reducing number of processes in the tests, so apparently some folks care and I presume they want to see something like that to happen. I do not think $re is a good name for such a variable, though ;-)
On 02/07/2019 18:23, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes: > >>> As long as sed implementation used here does not do anything funny >>> to CR, I think the approach to strip everything before the last CR >>> on the line is sensible. As I am not familiar with how Windows port >>> of sed wants to treat a CR byte in the pattern, I am not sure about >>> the precondition of the above statement, though. >> >> I wondered about that too, but it passes the CI tests under windows. > > Hopefully Git for Windows, MinGW, and CygWin would all behave > similarly. > >>> I also have to wonder if we can/want to do this without an extra >>> printf process every time we sanitize the output, though I do not >>> think I care too deeply about it. >> >> I could add 're="$(printf ...)"' to the setup at the top of the file >> if you want > > As I do not care too deeply about it, we recently saw a lot about > reducing number of processes in the tests, so apparently some folks > care and I presume they want to see something like that to happen. > I do not think $re is a good name for such a variable, though ;-) Yes, $re was just a place holder - naming is hard ... Best Wishes Phillip
diff --git a/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh b/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh index 9186e90127..0454018584 100755 --- a/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh +++ b/t/t3420-rebase-autostash.sh @@ -48,8 +48,8 @@ create_expected_success_interactive () { q_to_cr >expected <<-EOF $(grep "^Created autostash: [0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*\$" actual) HEAD is now at $(git rev-parse --short feature-branch) third commit - Rebasing (1/2)QRebasing (2/2)QApplied autostash. - Q QSuccessfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. + Applied autostash. + Successfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. EOF } @@ -67,13 +67,13 @@ create_expected_failure_am () { } create_expected_failure_interactive () { - q_to_cr >expected <<-EOF + cat >expected <<-EOF $(grep "^Created autostash: [0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*\$" actual) HEAD is now at $(git rev-parse --short feature-branch) third commit - Rebasing (1/2)QRebasing (2/2)QApplying autostash resulted in conflicts. + Applying autostash resulted in conflicts. Your changes are safe in the stash. You can run "git stash pop" or "git stash drop" at any time. - Q QSuccessfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. + Successfully rebased and updated refs/heads/rebased-feature-branch. EOF } @@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ testrebase () { suffix=interactive fi && create_expected_success_$suffix && - test_i18ncmp expected actual + sed "$(printf "s/.*\\r//")" <actual >actual2 && + test_i18ncmp expected actual2 ' test_expect_success "rebase$type: dirty index, non-conflicting rebase" ' @@ -209,7 +210,8 @@ testrebase () { suffix=interactive fi && create_expected_failure_$suffix && - test_i18ncmp expected actual + sed "$(printf "s/.*\\r//")" <actual >actual2 && + test_i18ncmp expected actual2 ' }