From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:27560 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933096Ab3CMRp6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Mar 2013 13:45:58 -0400 Message-ID: <5140BB50.9080403@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:45:52 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rich Johnston CC: xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] xfstests: keep newlines out of SCRATCH_DEV_POOL References: <1363186623-1378-1-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com> <1363186623-1378-3-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com> <5140BAAC.4050508@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <5140BAAC.4050508@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 3/13/13 12:43 PM, Rich Johnston wrote: > On 03/13/2013 09:57 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> SCRATCH_DEV_POOL processing actually takes the first >> device out for SCRATCH_DEV and leaves the rest in >> SCRATCH_DEV_POOL. >> >> I'm not totally sold on that behavior, but for now, >> at least don't populate SCRATCH_DEV_POOL with newlines. > >> >> Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen >> --- >> common.config | 2 +- >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/common.config b/common.config >> index ed0f44c..5ac58bf 100644 >> --- a/common.config >> +++ b/common.config >> @@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ if [ ! -z "$SCRATCH_DEV_POOL" ]; then >> exit 1 >> fi >> SCRATCH_DEV=`echo $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL | awk '{print $1}'` >> - SCRATCH_DEV_POOL=`echo $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL | awk '{ for (i = 2; i <= NF; i++) print $i}'` >> + SCRATCH_DEV_POOL=`echo $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL | awk '{ ORS=" "; for (i = 2; i <= NF; i++) print $i}'` >> fi >> >> echo $SCRATCH_DEV | grep -q ":" > /dev/null 2>&1 >> > > Is the purpose of this patch is so future improvements will be able to parse/use SCRATCH_DEV_POOL easier from within bash? Yep, and just generally since it's used as an argument, feeding a string w/ newlines to any command is just a bit odd. -Eric > Looks good Eric. > > Reviewed-by: > > Regards > --Rich