xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] common: use a relative path to fsstress

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] common: use a relative path to fsstress
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 07:49:13 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20140504104510.GA9510@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20140504104510.GA9510@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 03:45:10AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> All commands run as $qa_user should use a relative path so that
> missing access permissions on $HOME for root don't prevent running
> it.  This fixes common/233 for me.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> 
> --- a/common/config
> +++ b/common/config
> @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ export MOUNT_PROG="`set_prog_path mount`"
>  export UMOUNT_PROG="`set_prog_path umount`"
>  [ "$UMOUNT_PROG" = "" ] && _fatal "umount not found"
>  
> -export FSSTRESS_PROG="`set_prog_path fsstress $PWD/ltp/fsstress`"
> +export FSSTRESS_PROG="./ltp/fsstress"

Why remove the set_prog_path call? i.e. this should work:

+export FSSTRESS_PROG="`set_prog_path fsstress ./ltp/fsstress`"

Otherwise, a comment explaining why set_prog_path is not used just
for this binary would be appropriate....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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