From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47412 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934046AbdEVOry (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 May 2017 10:47:54 -0400 Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 22:47:49 +0800 From: Eryu Guan Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Drop _require_fssum Message-ID: <20170522144749.GU7250@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> References: <20170522010528.23463-1-tytso@mit.edu> <20170522010528.23463-2-tytso@mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170522010528.23463-2-tytso@mit.edu> Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Theodore Ts'o Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 09:05:28PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Now that fssum is built unconditionally, we no longer need > _require_fssum. > > Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o > --- > common/rc | 6 ------ > tests/btrfs/007 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/016 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/030 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/038 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/039 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/040 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/043 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/044 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/045 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/046 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/050 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/051 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/053 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/077 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/083 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/084 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/087 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/092 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/127 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/128 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/129 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/133 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/134 | 1 - > tests/btrfs/135 | 1 - > 25 files changed, 30 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > index 65886886..796f60e7 100644 > --- a/common/rc > +++ b/common/rc > @@ -3164,12 +3164,6 @@ _require_ugid_map() > fi > } > > -_require_fssum() > -{ > - FSSUM_PROG=$here/src/fssum > - [ -x $FSSUM_PROG ] || _notrun "fssum not built" > -} > - I think this is still needed. It has FSSUM_PROG definition (otherwise all these btrfs tests failed due to unable to find $FSSUM_PROG), and we do check for existence of binary files in src, even the file is built unconditionally on make. They can be removed accidently or one may forget to build a newly added test. Thanks, Eryu