[git-buildpackage] [PATCH 06/11] ComponentTestBase: add ls_tree() method

[Guido Günther]

Hi,
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 02:05:31PM +0300, Markus Lehtonen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, 2015-10-08 at 13:18 +0300, Markus Lehtonen wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 02/04/15 08:10, "Guido Günther" <agx at sigxcpu.org> wrote:
> > 
> > >On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:05:01AM +0300, Markus Lehtonen wrote:
> > >> Signed-off-by: Markus Lehtonen <markus.lehtonen at linux.intel.com>
> > >> ---
> > >>  tests/component/__init__.py | 7 +++++++
> > >>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > >> 
> > >> diff --git a/tests/component/__init__.py b/tests/component/__init__.py
> > >> index b0376c1..4b070ab 100644
> > >> --- a/tests/component/__init__.py
> > >> +++ b/tests/component/__init__.py
> > >> @@ -134,6 +134,13 @@ class ComponentTestBase(GbpLogTester):
> > >>                          (list(extra), list(missing))
> > >>          assert not extra and not missing, assert_msg
> > >>  
> > >> +    @staticmethod
> > >> +    def ls_tree(repo, treeish):
> > >> +        """List contents (blobs) in a git treeish"""
> > >> +        objs = repo.list_tree(treeish, True)
> > >> +        blobs = [obj[3] for obj in objs if obj[1] == 'blob']
> > >> +        return set(blobs)
> > >> +
> > >
> > >
> > >I was under the impression that ComponentTestBase hass additional
> > >asserts for tests. This one doesn't assert? Does this better fit onto
> > >the ComponentTestBaseGitRepository itself or even GitRepository itself?
> > >Cheers,
> > 
> > Hmm, what was I thinking when adding this here... This is supposed to be a
> > helper method quite similar to ls_dir() et al. Thus, it should've gone to
> > testutils. But, now that you pointed it out ComponentTestBaseGitRepository
> > seems like a better place.
> 
> This is now fixed in my latest patchset available at:
> 
>   git://github.com/marquiz/git-buildpackage-rpm.git
> feature/upstream/buildpackage-rpm
> 
> The commit subject was changed to "ComponentTestGitRepository: add
> ls_tree() method".

Applied now. Thanks!
 -- Guido

> 
> 
> Thanks,
>    Markus
>