Re: [PATCH] tools: mkenvimage: Add pure shell implementation of mkenvimage

[Alexander Dahl <ada@thorsis.com>]

Hi Marek,

had a short look on your script yesterday.  Looks clean and well
designed, nice job.

Am Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 09:38:58PM +0100 schrieb Marek Vasut:
> On 2/6/25 1:38 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Marek,
> > 
> > On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 at 07:37, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> > > 
> > > Add implementation of mkenvimage written purely in bourne shell.
> > > 
> > > This is not a replacement for mkenvimage tool, but rather a simple
> > > implementation which can be used in environments where mkenvimage
> > > itself cannot be deployed due to various constraints, like hardware
> > > manufacturing plants, but where bourne shell and basic tool are
> > > already available.
> > > 
> > > The external dependencies which are not shell built-ins are gzip
> > > and grep.
> > > 
> > > All mkenvimage parameters are implemented and compatible with the
> > > C implementation of mkenvimage.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> > > ---
> > > Cc: Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger@ni.com>
> > > Cc: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
> > > ---
> > >   tools/mkenvimage.sh | 126 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >   1 file changed, 126 insertions(+)
> > >   create mode 100755 tools/mkenvimage.sh
> > 
> > Would it be worth adding a simple test for this?
> Sure, is there an existing test for similar case I can look at ?

I thought about testing yesterday, but had no good idea on top, but
now it's discussed anyways …  How about throwing the same input
at the c and the sh version and assert the output is the same?  For
more sophisticated tests it should be tested with both variants.

Greets
Alex