xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Use qa_user and qa_group for test 219

To: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use qa_user and qa_group for test 219
From: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:44:39 -0600
Cc: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20121218183052.GG27055@xxxxxxx>
References: <1355830435-5942-1-git-send-email-jack@xxxxxxx> <50D071BE.20000@xxxxxxxxxx> <20121218175006.GD5987@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20121218183052.GG27055@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:30:52PM -0600, Ben Myers wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 06:50:06PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 18-12-12 08:38:06, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > On 12/18/2012 06:33 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > > Test 219 requires a special user. Use $qa_user and $qa_group (added in 
> > > > this
> > > > patch) for that purpose instead of hardcoded uid & gid. This also fixes
> > > > a false failure when repquota does not report quota for users not in 
> > > > passwd.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > ...
> > > > +# check for the fsgqa group on the machine
> > > > +#
> > > > +_require_group()
> > > > +{
> > > > +    qa_group=fsgqa
> > > > +    _cat_group | grep -q $qa_user
> > > > +    [ "$?" == "0" ] || _notrun "$qa_user user not defined."
> > > 
> > > I assume you mean to use $qa_group instead of $qa_user in the above two
> > > lines?
> >   Bah, right. The names are the same so I didn't notice my copy-and-paste
> > mistake :). Fixed version attached.
> 
> The 2nd rev looks good to me.  It makes sense that you'd remove the uid
> specific golden output since fsgqa isn't going to be the same uid/gid on all
> systems.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>

committed to git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfstests.git, master branch.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use qa_user and qa_group for test 219, Ben Myers <=