Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 03:48:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> No, this is not about a quiz on regexp compatibility between Perl >> and sed. >> >> Back when cdbdc6bf (t: refactor tests depending on Perl substitution >> operator, 2025-04-03) rewrite many use of perl with sed, the general > > s/rewrite many use/rewrote many uses/ > >> pattern of the original scripts were >> >> chmod +w some_read_only_file && >> perl -p -e "regexp to munge" some_read_only_file >some_tmp && >> mv some_tmp some_read_only_file >> >> persumably because the author new replacing some_read_only_file with > > s/new/knew? > >> diff --git a/t/t6011-rev-list-with-bad-commit.sh b/t/t6011-rev-list-with-bad-commit.sh >> index b6f3344dbf..1dd1e50d21 100755 >> --- a/t/t6011-rev-list-with-bad-commit.sh >> +++ b/t/t6011-rev-list-with-bad-commit.sh >> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ test_expect_success 'verify number of revisions' \ >> test_expect_success 'corrupt second commit object' ' >> for p in .git/objects/pack/*.pack >> do >> + chmod +w "$p" && >> sed "s/second commit/socond commit/" "$p" >"$p.munged" && >> mv "$p.munged" "$p" || >> return 1 > > Ok, the fix makes sense. Thanks! > > Patrick Thanks for typofixes and sanity checking.
