Re: [PATCH] xfstests: fix to build src/realpath and the correct the existence of target devices

From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: sat <takeuchi_satoru@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>, xfs mailing list <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: fix to build src/realpath and the correct the existence of target devices
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:28:34 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50AB1502.2030603@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50AB077F.5000003@jp.fujitsu.com>

On 11/19/12 10:30 PM, sat wrote:
> (2012/11/20 13:06), Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 11/18/12 9:26 PM, sat wrote:
>>> Hi Rich, Eric
>>>
>>> (2012/10/27 1:46), Rich Johnston wrote:
>>>> On 06/08/2010 03:03 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>>> If you try running xfstests on lvm volumes which are symlinks,
>>>>> it'll fail to run several tests because our _require_scratch
>>>>> framework ultimately uses lstat not stat, and does not think
>>>>> the lvm device (which is usually a symlink to a dm-X device)
>>>>> is a block device.  Sigh.
>>>>>
>>>>> Last try at this - just resolve any symlinked devicenames
>>>>> into their realpath(3) in common.config.
>>>>>
>>>>> This actually seems to work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/common.config b/common.config
>>>>> index 926846b..e5b2483 100644
>>>>> --- a/common.config
>>>>> +++ b/common.config
>>>>
>>>> Looks good
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>
>>>>
>>>> Eric,
>>>>
>>>> This patch has been committed to git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfstests, master branch, commit ID d5ea873f.
>>>
>>> From: Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@jp.fujitsu.com>
>>>
>>> Commit d5ea873f is not the same as the the following original Eric's patch.
>>>
>>> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2010-06/msg00080.html
>>>
>>> It does not modify src/Makefile and realpath is never compiled.
>>
>> Yep, whoops.  Merge error . . .?
>>
>>> In addition, `[ -L $TEST_DEV ]' and `[ -L $SCRATCH_DEV ]' always returns 0
>>> if $TEST_DEV or $SCRATCH_DEV are not defined.
>>
>> Well, I don't think ./check will get very far with an undefined TEST_DEV or
>> SCRATCH_DEV, but better this way, thanks.
> 
> I think so too. But setting $SCRATCH_DEV is optional anyaway (refer to README).
> I forgot to specify $SCRATCH_DEV and found this problem.

Ah, right - yes, that's perfectly valid, sorry.  Not thinking straight :)

-Eric

> Satoru
> 
> 

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