forks/apenwarr-redo
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

minimal/do: redo vs redo-ifchange, and fix empty target handling.

Browse source 
We previously assumed that redo and redo-ifchange are the same in
minimal/do's design, because it rebuilds all targets on every run, and
so there's no reason to ever build the same target more than once.

Unfortunately that's incorrect: if you run 'redo x' from two points in
a single run (or even twice in the same .do file), we expect x to be
built twice.  If you wanted redo to decide whether to build it the
second time, you should have used redo-ifchange.

t/102-empty/touchtest was trying to test for this.  However, a
second bug in minimal/do made the test pass anyway.  minimal/do would
*always* rebuild any target x that produced no output, not caring
whether it had tried to build before, whether you used redo or
redo-ifchange.  And while we tested that redo would redo a file that
had been deleted, we didn't ensure that it would redo a file that was
*not* deleted, nor that redo-ifchange would *not* redo that file.

Fix both bugs in minimal/do, and make t/102-empty/touchtest cover the
missing cases.
This commit is contained in:
Avery Pennarun 2018-10-17 01:42:32 -04:00
commit f345eae290
3 changed files with 32 additions and 3 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
t/102-empty/clean.do
View file

@ -1 +1 @@
rm -f touch1 *~ .*~
rm -f touch1 touch1-ran *~ .*~