Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] t9010-svn-fi: Add tests for svn-fi

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 08:19:49 +0530

Hi Jonathan,

Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> 
> > Create a test-svn-fi in toplevel directory, add rules to build it, and
> > add some basic tests.
> 
> Thanks.  Probably this should be squashed with patch #1?

Right. Will do.

> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/t/t9010-svn-fi.sh
> 
> Test number's already taken.  9012 is free, though.

Ok. Will rename in the next iteration.

> > @@ -0,0 +1,303 @@
> > +#!/bin/sh
> > +
> > +test_description='check svn dumpfile exporter'
> > +
> > +. ./test-lib.sh
> > +
> > +if ! svnadmin -h >/dev/null 2>&1
> > +then
> > +	skip_all='skipping svn-fi tests, svn not available'
> > +	test_done
> > +fi
> 
> Is it impossible to test without svn present or otherwise speed
> these up?  Some random ideas:
> 
>  - feed svn-fi output into svn-fe and compare git repos
>  - check if "svn-fi after svn-fe" is idempotent (should it be?)
>  - check for individual salient features from svn-fi output, using
>    "grep", "sed", or "awk" to ignore the rest
>  - use svnrdump in place of "svnadmin load" if available (is it
>    faster?)
>  - find the bottleneck in svnadmin and fix it
> 
> Of course at least one test of the "svn-fe | svnadmin load"
> pipeline seems worthwhile; I'm just thinking we should avoid
> habits that slow down the test suite too much.

Hm, I'm not entirely convinced -- the final verdict is always dictated
by whether or not the emitted dumpstream loads. Many streams that look
alright to the eye don't actually load because of small intricacies
like missing newlines. It'll be awfully complicated reverse-engineer
all these intricate rules and write them in terms of sed/ awk
commands. Yes, svnrdump will be faster, but it'll only be available
with the later versions of Subversion (same problem with fixing
svnadmin bottlenecks).

> > +svn_look () {
> > +	subcommand=$1 &&
> > +	shift &&
> > +	svnlook "$subcommand" "$svnrepo" "$@"
> > +}
> 
> Needed?  The svn_cmd function exists to point to a configuration
> directory.

Just a convinience: I am using svn_look to look at the properties of
nodes in several tests. If I don't use this in enough tests, I'll
factor it out.

> > +test_expect_success 'normal empty files' '
> > +	reinit_svn &&
> > +	cat >expect.tree <<-\EOF &&
> > +	/
> > +	 foo
> > +	 bar
> > +	EOF
> > +	cat >input <<-\EOF &&
> > +	reset refs/heads/master
> > +	commit refs/heads/master
> > +	mark :1
> > +	author nobody <nobody@localhost> 1170199019 +0100
> > +	committer nobody <nobody@localhost> 1170199019 +0100
> 
> Where do the dates come from?  Why should I (the reader) expect
> them?

What do you suggest? I need some valid "generic" timestamp + offset.

> > +# TODO: How to test date? Need to convert from local timestamp
> 
> Ah, you saw. :)
> 
> One possibility is to fuzz away whatever is unimportant when
> comparing results (and using tools like "awk" to extract the
> date to perform whatever tests on it are appropriate where it
> matters).

Okay, I'll try this. Is there no other way? Can we whip up a shell
script to convert the timestamp?

> > +test_expect_success 'malformed fast-import stream: author 2' '
> > +	reinit_svn &&
> > +	cat >input <<-\EOF &&
> > +	reset refs/heads/master
> > +	commit refs/heads/master
> > +	mark :1
> > +	author nobody <localhost> 1170199019 +0100
> > +	committer nobody <nobody@localhost> 1170199019 +0100
> > +	data 0
> > +	M 100644 inline foo
> > +	data 0
> > +
> > +	EOF
> > +	try_load input must_fail
> 
> What's wrong with this stream?

author nobody <localhost>
                        ^
Parse error there, since build_svn_author tries to use the part of the
email address appearing before the '@'. This is just a temporary test
-- we should make the svn_author generation logic configurable.

> > +test_expect_success 'svn:special and svn:executable' '
> > +	reinit_svn &&
> > +	cat >input <<-\EOF &&
> > +	reset refs/heads/master
> > +	commit refs/heads/master
> > +	mark :1
> > +	author nobody <nobody@localhost> 1170199019 +0100
> > +	committer nobody <nobody@localhost> 1170199019 +0100
> > +	data 7
> > +	nothing
> > +	M 100755 inline foo
> > +	data 0
> > +	M 755 inline moo
> > +	data 0
> > +	M 120000 inline bar
> > +	data 0
> > +
> > +	EOF
> > +	try_load input &&
> > +	svn_look propget svn:executable foo &&
> > +	svn_look propget svn:executable moo &&
> > +	svn_look propget svn:special bar
> 
> Maybe worth checking for the absence of svn:executable +
> svn:special from an ordinary file, too?

Good idea.

> > +test_expect_success 'replace symlink with normal file' '
> 
> Nice.  "replace symlink with executable" and "replace symlink
> with directory" might also be interesting.

Good idea. Will do.

-- Ram