From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o0UJA8Md231103 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:10:08 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 8859C1C92398 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 11:11:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id uT0aLcH3FAOakiF7 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 11:11:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:11:13 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests 224: test aio hole-fill at 4g Message-ID: <20100130191113.GC10181@infradead.org> References: <4B633F9A.8000404@sandeen.net> <20100130105501.GA22909@infradead.org> <4B645B0D.205@sandeen.net> <20100130172502.GA788@thunk.org> <4B647AFE.5000507@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B647AFE.5000507@sandeen.net> 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: Eric Sandeen Cc: Christoph Hellwig , ext4 development , tytso@mit.edu, Giel de Nijs , xfs-oss On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:31:26PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > These are the deps that I know xfstests has, to build and to run: > > BuildRequires: autoconf, libtool, xfsprogs-devel, e2fsprogs-devel > BuildRequires: libacl-devel, libattr-devel, libaio-devel > > Requires: bash, xfsprogs, xfsdump, perl, acl, attr, bind-utils > Requires: bc, indent, quota > > which isn't so bad... Doesn't seem to bad. Indent is afaik only needed for the weird 122 test which doesn't apply to non-xfs filesystems. > I'm not sure an xfsprogs dependency is so onerous; plenty has depended > on e2fsprogs through the years and we've lived with that ;) But > the lag time for xfsprogs to use released xfs_io functionality is a > bit of a bummer. > > But I guess I don't have a great answer for who else uses xfs_io: I use xfs_io in lots various local scripts. It's a really handly tool for exercising some of the more weird I/O related syscalls. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs