Can you just ignore 514 for a while?
It and the pmie changes are still in a bit of a state of flux.
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 03:26 -0500, Nathan Scott wrote:
> FYI - I'm seeing this qa issue, I guess as a result of these
> commits...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > commit 8473e700053f04fb72b083cfb12f38246dd60160
> > Author: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Fri Nov 23 21:19:43 2012 +1100
> >
> > pmie - %h/%v/%i tweaks, -d fixes
> >
> > Update the man page to be more precise about how the bindings for
> > %h, %v and %i are made in rules.
> >
> > Some cosmetic code changes to improve comments.
> >
> > Several fixups for -d (debug mode) where the code was just wrong
> > and had regressed as changes had been made over the years in
> > other
> > parts of pmie.
> >
> > [this is an interim commit, I expect there will be more to come]
> >
> > commit 4bb4f65cf5a277b0c2242748648a993a036482d3
> > Author: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Fri Nov 23 21:17:42 2012 +1100
> >
> > qa/514 - new - exercise pmie -d
> >
> > As part of the validation of the %h, %i and %v selectors in pmie
> > rules.
> >
>
> [85%] 514 - output mismatch (see 514.out.bad)
> 798a799
> > DATE: (null)
> 802a804
> > DATE: (null)
> 806a809
> > DATE: (null)
> 810a814
> > DATE: (null)
> 814a819
> > DATE: (null)
> 840c845
> < min_inst sample.part.bin :LOCALHOST
> ---
> > min_inst sample_part.bin :LOCALHOST
>
>
> cheers.
>
> --
> Nathan
|