xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfstests 273: fix a typo

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests 273: fix a typo
From: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 12:06:01 +0100
Cc: dsterba@xxxxxxx, Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@xxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20130307033849.GB6369@dastard>
Mail-followup-to: dsterba@xxxxxxx, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@xxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <512DAC1A.2040601@xxxxxxxxx> <20130306232222.GF21081@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20130307033849.GB6369@dastard>
Reply-to: dsterba@xxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2011-07-01)
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:38:49PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:22:22AM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:47:54PM +0800, Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:
> > > - cp -r $SCRATCH_MNT/origin $SCRATCH_MNT/sub_$_suffix >$seq.full 2>&1
> > > + cp -r $SCRATCH_MNT/origin $SCRATCH_MNT/sub_$_suffix >>$seq.full 2>&1

This is quote from the mail, but the merged patch does something else.

> >     +./273: line 95: syntax error near unexpected token `&'
> >     +./273: line 95: `  cp -r $SCRATCH_MNT/origin $SCRATCH_MNT/sub_$_suffix 
> > >$seq.full 2>>&1'
> >     +umount: /dev/sda9: not mounted

> that seems rather strange. The patch does this:
> 
>       ....sub_$_suffix >>$seq.full 2>&1

http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/cmds/xfstests.git;a=commitdiff;h=0c5e67e46e476b70290033efc7feb784f7ecbab1;hp=08557e219c12e573be459407033495899f46967a

--- a/273
+++ b/273
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ _porter()
                exit
        fi
 
-       cp -r $SCRATCH_MNT/origin $SCRATCH_MNT/sub_$_suffix >$seq.full 2>&1
+       cp -r $SCRATCH_MNT/origin $SCRATCH_MNT/sub_$_suffix >$seq.full 2>>&1
        if [ $? -ne 0 ]
        then
                echo "_porter $_suffix not complete"
---

> and the error output you see is
> 
>       ....sub_$_suffix >$seq.full 2>>&1
> 
> So it doesn't look lie you are running with the change that is
> actually in the patch...

There's a difference between the patch in mail and what has been merged, that
can happen, but I wonder why it works on your side.

Minimal reproducer that I used on machines with never bash:
---
touch origin
cp -r origin target >seq.full 2>>&1
---
bash --version: GNU bash, version 4.2.24(1)-release
and fails the same way.

> GNU bash, version 4.2.37(1)-release

I've checked bash sources (no git, just tar + context diff patches), there's no
apparent fix between 24-37 for that.

(Also tried to build a git tree, but filterdiff did not produce 1:1 unified
format of the separate patches and there are lots of conflicts).

If possible, I'd like avoid forcing a minimal version of bash, as the
enterprise distros do not always ship the latest ones, and this break the tests
unnecessarily.


david

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