From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Sun, 18 May 2008 18:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m4J1j6sr030830 for ; Sun, 18 May 2008 18:45:11 -0700 Message-ID: <4830DBC1.1060501@sgi.com> Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 11:45:37 +1000 From: Timothy Shimmin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't run test 167 if killall is not installed References: <20080515053918.GA16530@lst.de> <482BDAC1.7070407@sgi.com> <20080515071338.GA26247@lst.de> <20080515073605.GR155679365@sgi.com> <20080515073837.GA28530@lst.de> In-Reply-To: <20080515073837.GA28530@lst.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: David Chinner , xfs@oss.sgi.com Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 05:36:05PM +1000, David Chinner wrote: >>> Dave already commited the original version, but I'll send an update >>> to use set_prog_path later today. >> Sorry, didn't see that Tim replied as well. set_prog_path is fine >> by me too, but stopping every test from running because killall is >> not present is a bit of overkill, isn't it? > > My plan was to use it in 167 not common.config. But I don't really care > either way. Yeah, I was just meaning for 167 too. --Tim