From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o9KI20b7100971 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:02:00 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] xfstests: add _require_attrs From: Alex Elder In-Reply-To: <20101015222902.GB3781@infradead.org> References: <20101015222820.GA3655@infradead.org> <20101015222902.GB3781@infradead.org> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:03:11 -0500 Message-ID: <1287597791.2284.99.camel@doink> Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: aelder@sgi.com List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 18:29 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Add a new helper to check if extended attributes are supported. It > errors out if any of the attr tools are not found, or if a filesystem > does not support setting attributes. > > Remove the opencoded checks for the attr tools from various tests > now that we do them in common code. Generally this looks good. I was going to just make a few suggestions and ask you to fix them before committing, but I think there are enough that I think it would be good to re-submit this. > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig . . . > Index: xfstests-dev/021 > =================================================================== > --- xfstests-dev.orig/021 2010-10-15 12:52:08.000000000 +0000 > +++ xfstests-dev/021 2010-10-15 14:11:10.000000000 +0000 This file calls "attr" and "getfattr" directly in one spot each, rather than using "${ATTR_PROG}" and "${GETFATTR_PROG}". This conceivably means that the one used (or attempted) could disagree with the one that _require_attrs checks for. Can you fix these references? . . . > Index: xfstests-dev/062 > =================================================================== > --- xfstests-dev.orig/062 2010-10-15 12:52:08.000000000 +0000 > +++ xfstests-dev/062 2010-10-15 14:11:22.000000000 +0000 Same problem in this file--it consistently calls setfattr and getfattr directly rather than using their corresponding variables. . . . > Index: xfstests-dev/093 > =================================================================== > --- xfstests-dev.orig/093 2010-10-15 12:52:09.000000000 +0000 > +++ xfstests-dev/093 2010-10-15 12:52:59.000000000 +0000 Same problem here, with the use of attr directly. It looks like tests 097 and 098 should call _require_attr also. And then change their direct references to "attr" to use "${ATTR_PROG}" as well. . . . > Index: xfstests-dev/115 > =================================================================== > --- xfstests-dev.orig/115 2010-10-15 12:52:09.000000000 +0000 > +++ xfstests-dev/115 2010-10-15 14:12:21.000000000 +0000 This file should not call attr directly. . . . > Index: xfstests-dev/136 > =================================================================== > --- xfstests-dev.orig/136 2010-10-15 12:52:33.000000000 +0000 > +++ xfstests-dev/136 2010-10-15 14:12:35.000000000 +0000 This file should not call attr directly. . . . _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs