Re: [PATCH] t5319: don't trip over a user name with whitespace

[Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>]

Sorry I'm late to the thread. Thanks for reporting this issue, Johannes.

On 7/1/2019 7:33 AM, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 05:16:02AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>> I see Gábor suggested using "wc -c" elsewhere in the thread. That would
>> be fine with me, too, though I think the required sed there may be
>> getting pretty unreadable, too. :)
> 
> It could be done even without 'sed', though at the expense of running
> a coupe more 'wc -c's in a loop:>
> diff --git a/t/t5319-multi-pack-index.sh b/t/t5319-multi-pack-index.sh
> index 79bfaeafa9..bacec5e2e4 100755
> --- a/t/t5319-multi-pack-index.sh
> +++ b/t/t5319-multi-pack-index.sh
> @@ -443,7 +443,12 @@ test_expect_success 'repack with minimum size does not alter existing packs' '
>  		touch -m -t 201901010002 .git/objects/pack/pack-B* &&
>  		touch -m -t 201901010003 .git/objects/pack/pack-A* &&
>  		ls .git/objects/pack >expect &&
> -		MINSIZE=$(ls -l .git/objects/pack/*pack | awk "{print \$5;}" | sort -n | head -n 1) &&
> +		MINSIZE=$(
> +			for pack in .git/objects/pack/*pack
> +			do
> +				wc -c <"$pack"
> +			done | sort -n | head -n 1
> +		) &&
>  		git multi-pack-index repack --batch-size=$MINSIZE &&
>  		ls .git/objects/pack >actual &&
>  		test_cmp expect actual
> @@ -455,7 +460,12 @@ test_expect_success 'repack creates a new pack' '
>  		cd dup &&
>  		ls .git/objects/pack/*idx >idx-list &&
>  		test_line_count = 5 idx-list &&
> -		THIRD_SMALLEST_SIZE=$(ls -l .git/objects/pack/*pack | awk "{print \$5;}" | sort -n | head -n 3 | tail -n 1) &&
> +		THIRD_SMALLEST_SIZE=$(
> +			for pack in .git/objects/pack/*pack
> +			do
> +				wc -c <"$pack"
> +			done | sort -n | head -n 3 | tail -n 1
> +		) &&
>  		BATCH_SIZE=$(($THIRD_SMALLEST_SIZE + 1)) &&
>  		git multi-pack-index repack --batch-size=$BATCH_SIZE &&
>  		ls .git/objects/pack/*idx >idx-list &&
> 
> Is it really better?  Dunno, but at least there is no subtlety with
> the leading padding spaces.

Your change is certainly more straight-forward, and avoids all issues
around Perl compatibility.

It does have the issue of more 'wc' processes, which is a downside. The
count here is not too bad, but if we need to duplicate this pattern elsewhere
we may be better off creating a stat(1) replacement in test-lib.sh.

Thanks,
-Stolee