xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Draft Snapshot Regression Test

To: Ragnar Kj?rstad <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Draft Snapshot Regression Test
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 14:37:37 +0200
Cc: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>, Greg Freemyer <freemyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs mailing list <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20020829141146.Q6228@vestdata.no>
References: <20020828232349.TILF8089.imf02bis.bellsouth.net@TAZ2> <20020829075821.GA503@frodo> <20020829141146.Q6228@vestdata.no>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 02:11:46PM +0200, Ragnar Kj?rstad wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 05:58:21PM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > > #Verify we have the a lvm enabled kernel
> > > # TODO (This assumes lvm is a module.  What if it is linked?  I don't 
> > > know how to check that.
> > > lsmod | grep lvm-mod;
> > > if [ $? != 0 ]; then _notrun "This test requires the LVM kernel module be 
> > > present"; fi
> > 
> > A better approach here would be to grep for lvm in /proc/devices,
> > this would work for module/non-module builds.
> 
> or 
> [ -d /proc/lvm ] || _notrun 

This will likely break with LVM2/EVMS, which have lvm compatible 
user utils and support snapshots, but not the /proc file.

-Andi


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>