--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45ECF431E64\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 31 Mar 2012 00:45:23 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -1.098\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,\r
+ NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+ by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+ with ESMTP id T1dKgLBflc8d for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Sat, 31 Mar 2012 00:45:22 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6])\r
+ (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+ (No client certificate requested)\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78A22431FAF\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 31 Mar 2012 00:45:22 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40])\r
+ by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1SDszs-0004em-6H; Sat, 31 Mar 2012 08:45:18 +0100\r
+Received: from 94-192-233-223.zone6.bethere.co.uk ([94.192.233.223]\r
+ helo=localhost)\r
+ by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1SDszr-0006S1-Sv; Sat, 31 Mar 2012 08:45:16 +0100\r
+From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+To: Peter Wang <novalazy@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] test: Add tests for 'config' command\r
+In-Reply-To: <1333149350-22616-3-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com>\r
+References: <1332282698-7951-1-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com>\r
+ <1333149350-22616-1-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com>\r
+ <1333149350-22616-3-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.12+65~g8bf1842 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 08:45:25 +0100\r
+Message-ID: <877gy1p622.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+X-Sender-Host-Address: 94.192.233.223\r
+X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :)\r
+X-QM-Body-MD5: 3f9ae8ec3a697831a49261d5b05d41b4 (of first 20000 bytes)\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Score: -1.8\r
+X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: -\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to\r
+ determine if it is\r
+ spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam.\r
+ This message scored -1.8 points.\r
+ Summary of the scoring: \r
+ * -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,\r
+ * medium trust\r
+ * [138.37.6.40 listed in list.dnswl.org]\r
+ * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail\r
+ provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com)\r
+ * -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay\r
+ * domain\r
+ * 0.5 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list\r
+X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+ <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 07:45:23 -0000\r
+\r
+\r
+This whole series looks good to me with one minor query.\r
+\r
+> Start a new test script.\r
+> ---\r
+> test/config | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++\r
+> test/notmuch-test | 1 +\r
+> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)\r
+> create mode 100755 test/config\r
+>\r
+> diff --git a/test/config b/test/config\r
+> new file mode 100755\r
+> index 0000000..d3e574c\r
+> --- /dev/null\r
+> +++ b/test/config\r
+> @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@\r
+> +#!/usr/bin/env bash\r
+> +\r
+> +test_description='"notmuch config"'\r
+> +. test-lib.sh\r
+> +\r
+> +test_begin_subtest "Get string value"\r
+> +test_expect_equal "$(notmuch config get user.name)" "Notmuch Test Suite"\r
+> +\r
+> +test_begin_subtest "Get list value"\r
+> +test_expect_equal "$(notmuch config get new.tags)" "\\r
+> +unread\r
+> +inbox"\r
+> +\r
+> +test_expect_success "Set string value" \\r
+> + 'notmuch config set foo.bar baz'\r
+> +\r
+> +test_expect_success "Set list value" \\r
+> + 'notmuch config set foo.list xxx "yyy yyy" "zzz zzz"'\r
+\r
+It seems off to call is success without checking that the value has\r
+actually been set. Of course it is checked in the notmuch config list\r
+test introduced in the next commit but I think if it would be better to\r
+check with notmuch config get here too (i.e. check that reading back the\r
+value gives what you want). Otherwise a failure in `setting' will show up\r
+as a test failure in `listing'.\r
+\r
+Best wishes\r
+\r
+Mark\r
+\r
+> +\r
+> +test_done\r
+> diff --git a/test/notmuch-test b/test/notmuch-test\r
+> index f03b594..e08ec72 100755\r
+> --- a/test/notmuch-test\r
+> +++ b/test/notmuch-test\r
+> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ cd $(dirname "$0")\r
+> TESTS="\r
+> basic\r
+> help-test\r
+> + config\r
+> new\r
+> count\r
+> search\r
+> -- \r
+> 1.7.4.4\r
+>\r
+> _______________________________________________\r
+> notmuch mailing list\r
+> notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch\r
projects / notmuch-archives.git / commitdiff