[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Libguestfs] [PATCH 3/6] v2v:test:win: actually check the eventual layout



On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 03:19:21PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote:
> On Monday 05 October 2015 16:05:54 Roman Kagan wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:50:52PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote:
> > > On Monday 05 October 2015 15:40:03 Roman Kagan wrote:
> > > > +{
> > > >  guestfish --ro -a $d/windows-sda -i <<EOF
> > > > +  trace 1
> > > >    is-dir "/Program Files/Red Hat/Firstboot"
> > > >    is-file "/Program Files/Red Hat/Firstboot/firstboot.bat"
> > > >    is-dir "/Program Files/Red Hat/Firstboot/scripts"
> > > >    is-dir "/Windows/Drivers/VirtIO"
> > > > +  trace 0
> > > >  EOF
> > > > +} | {
> > > > +    ret=0
> > > > +    while read r; do
> > > > +        [ "$r" = "true" ] || ret=1
> > > > +    done
> > > > +    exit $ret
> > > > +}
> > > 
> > > Note we have tests that check the output of guestfish -- for example,
> > > fish/test-edit.sh (it is not the only one). I guess you could turn this
> > > test to do the same, which could be also easier to expand if there will
> > > be added more commands that output things different than "true".
> > 
> > Yes I have seen it but exactly because I foresee nothing but "true" in
> > guestfish's output I want to avoid tedious beancounting when maintaining
> > the expected result string.
> 
> Never say never... really, better make it slightly more generic, so
> expanding it later is no hassle.

It sure is.  E.g. in another patch in the series I add more is-file
commands here, and I generate them with a shell "for" loop; a constant
string for the expected reply with a dozen of "true" lines would look
weird IMO.

> Also, comparing to the exact output expected is a check more that we
> got the number of lines expected.

This is rather a check for guestfish which we assume already tested
here.

Roman.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]