From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD6A71F9FD for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 19:36:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231624AbhBRTcl (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:32:41 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:56539 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233745AbhBRTG3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:06:29 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BD0712ACF4; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:05:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=zQDooGK3EV9SzuAbjXCA8IIJ8pI=; b=KGJVBD xpLQdU/DsuX9NDiPrqslMQfn6SO82nzfSbBPAX+LzjuRI4Ef0vHOZVN8sqQcsmW2 q+KuW4tfbipKR+w6QVDM+AAk1FKxHIDWKKTKy1MxDGAVNWYy+FWoqFd2sjZWwBQx G3nh3Zu2FP5vghP9r23Gr5sRwkRXUlXnK7xvI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ezT1UXVXJbo1zKe+IHM3rRFK9NrjIVn9 roDG9SHJ8liawWW/2Co2x5An9rcyIGuaUJ2TGAlgP4JQ0RGKF6ORvsFA0wCkL6OD f+UT8Ky7kTMc9K0tA8lxlUR6HsOi2nN0z4sVwtuR9LjdtLi+BmR+Qn4I4nc8IBlu CnYpZUUfhI4= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74C2612ACF3; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:05:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9C45B12ACF0; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:05:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Matheus Tavares Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, newren@gmail.com, stolee@gmail.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/7] t3705: add tests for `git add` in sparse checkouts References: <20210218143837.16527-1-matheus.bernardino@usp.br> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:05:42 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20210218143837.16527-1-matheus.bernardino@usp.br> (Matheus Tavares's message of "Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:38:37 -0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 4CB58930-721C-11EB-82EC-E43E2BB96649-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Matheus Tavares writes: > Then, the test would become: > > setup_sparse_entry && > test-tool cached_mtime sparse_entry >before && > test-tool chmtime -60 sparse_entry && > git add --refresh sparse_entry && > test-tool cached_mtime sparse_entry >after && > test_cmp before after > > What do you think? I do not see much point in introducing a duplicated "ls-files --debug" that gives only a subset of its output. Even if we add test-tool, we would need to reserve the right to change its output format any time, so I am not sure what we'd be gaining by avoiding the use of existing one. Thanks.