From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:8159 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752700AbbC0OPE (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:15:04 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 15:14:58 +0100 From: Karel Zak To: Ruediger Meier Cc: util-linux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: question about logger tests Message-ID: <20150327141458.GN1749@ws.net.home> References: <201503261450.33545.sweet_f_a@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <201503261450.33545.sweet_f_a@gmx.de> Sender: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 02:50:33PM +0100, Ruediger Meier wrote: > Our logger tests fail if it can't connect to /dev/log. I'd like to fix > that case for the test-suite but have some questions: > > 1. It was confusing for me to figure out the actual > problem. Maybe --no-act and/or --stderr should imply > that --socket-errors=auto turns error printing on? Hmm.. probably good idea. > 2. Alternatively we could use --socket-errors=on for all tests. > > 3. Couldn't we fix --no-act to not need an open /dev/log at all? But then it will introduce another fragility, complexity and difference between test (--no-act) and non-test mode. I see for example "if(ctl->fd < 0)" in code. Now it really skips write() only. Karel -- Karel Zak http://karelzak.blogspot.com