Re: [PATCH] Make ./new work for non-root user

[Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>]

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 11:37:58AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 25-05-18 11:30:34, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 08:30:55PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > Currently 'new' script sources common/config which tries to find mkfs
> > > and fails if not found (which is likely for non-root user). This is
> > > inconvenient as development usually does not happen as root. In fact the
> > > vast majority of setup in common/config and common/rc is not necessary
> > > for 'new'. Split out the necessary bits into new common/config-base and
> > > use it in 'new'. Cleanup common/rc and common/config now that it's only
> > > used from 'check'.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> > ....
> > > --- a/common/rc
> > > +++ b/common/rc
> > > @@ -20,18 +20,9 @@
> > >  #  Mountain View, CA 94043, USA, or: http://www.sgi.com
> > >  #-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >  
> > > -BC=$(which bc 2> /dev/null) || BC=
> > > +. common/config
> > 
> > Doesn't this means we now include common/config in every test setup
> > routine, even though the environment it sets up is inherited from
> > the check function.
> 
> What you describe was happening already in the past AFAICT. The test gets
> executed as "./$seq" so only exported variables are inherited.  Thus 'iam'
> variable is not set when executing the test and therefore common/rc was
> already including common/config. Also including common/config in each test
> is even required to get functions declared there. Am I missing something?

No, I just read the code incorrectly. The way common/config gets
included is a maze of twisty passages - I'll go back and look at the
patch again...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com