[PATCH] xfstests: don't run 122 if required headers aren't found

[PATCH] xfstests: don't run 122 if required headers aren't found

[Eric Sandeen]

Now that libxfs etc is optional, 122 (which compiles on the fly)
is failing if those extra headers are missing.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
---

diff --git a/122 b/122
index 7123753..9fbe437 100755
--- a/122
+++ b/122
@@ -191,7 +191,8 @@ awk '
 echo 'return 0; }' >>$cprog
 
 # create and run program
-cc -o $oprog $cprog
+cc -o $oprog $cprog >> $seq.full 2>&1 || \
+  _notrun "Could not compile test program (see end of $seq.full)"
 $oprog | _type_size_filter > $progout
 
 #

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: don't run 122 if required headers aren't found

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 12:17:10PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Now that libxfs etc is optional, 122 (which compiles on the fly)
> is failing if those extra headers are missing.

Oh, the great 122 tests.  Indeed without all the headers defining
the structures we can't actually check their size.


Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: don't run 122 if required headers aren't found

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 01:51:03PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 12:17:10PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > Now that libxfs etc is optional, 122 (which compiles on the fly)
> > is failing if those extra headers are missing.
> 
> Oh, the great 122 tests.  Indeed without all the headers defining
> the structures we can't actually check their size.
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Umm, should be:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs