[darcs-users] [patch135] Accept issue1726: Files with _darcs prefix are always ...

Daniel Dickison bugs at darcs.net
Thu Jan 14 03:31:01 UTC 2010


Daniel Dickison <danieldickison at gmail.com> added the comment:

On Jan 13, 2010, at 9:59 PM, Trent W. Buck wrote:

> Trent W. Buck <trentbuck at gmail.com> added the comment:
> 
> Daniel Dickison wrote:
>> Mon Jan 11 16:03:34 EST 2010  Daniel Dickison <danieldickison at gmail.com>
>>  * Accept issue1726: Files with _darcs prefix are always boring
> 
>> +# Passing --boring should definitely succeed.
>> +touch _darcsfoo
>> +darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
>> +darcs add --boring _darcsfoo
>> +darcs revert -a _darcsfoo
>> +
>> +# Without --boring, it should succeed given the default boring file.
>> +touch _darcsfoo
>> +darcs whatsnew -ls
>> +darcs add _darcsfoo
>> +darcs revert -a _darcsfoo
> 
> I'm concerned that using "_darcsfoo" both times might trip unrelated
> bugs in pending.  I suggest using _darcsbar the second time, and
> simply doing a normal record.
> 
>    touch _darcsfoo
>    darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
>    darcs record --look-for-adds --boring _darcsfoo
> 
>    touch _darcsbar
>    darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
>    darcs record --look-for-adds --boring _darcsbar

My thought was to use `--boring' for the first pass to test the hardcoded stuff, then without that flag the second time to test the default boring file.  It would make sense to use different filenames for the two, though, like you said (though I think that would still require a `revert' between the two in order to test `whatsnew').

As far as I can tell, `record' doesn't take the --boring flag (though maybe it should?).  Also, if we do use `record' instead of `add', I presume we also need to pass `--all' so it doesn't get stuck at the prompt?

__________________________________
Darcs bug tracker <bugs at darcs.net>
<http://bugs.darcs.net/patch135>
__________________________________


More information about the darcs-users mailing list