----- Original Message -----
> On 03/06/15 12:22, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > ...
> > 1052 is also still in need of some sorting love too, I haven't got to
> > that part yet (from my later mail). Ken, maybe dbpmda should give us
> > a sort-the-names-pdu-contents option, for QA? (see attachment to the
> > earlier mail I sent David on this for sample .bad)
>
> I'm not sure what you're looking for in the
> "sort-the-names-pdu-contents" option ... I save the 1052.out.bad in the
> email, but don't have a baseline 1052.out (in my tree) to compare it to
> so perhaps you could send that to me by email, or I'll wait till all of
> this makes it into the official tree.
(see attached)
> But if I was to guess, I would think it is more appropriate to chop,
> sort and paste output in a QA test (as we've done elsewhere) rather than
> ask dbpmda to rewrite a PDU.
Well, it'd be reordering the printfs rather than the PDU itself ... but,
yeah I understand the reluctance. Dealing with it in the QA test will be
a bit of a pain because we send through a pipeline of commands and would
ideally just control the output at a high level.
Yes, could split/cut/sed/awk etc but it will just make the test complex
(and other tests wanting similar dbpmda output).
Unfortunately, its not quite as simple a change (adding a qsort) as I'd
originally hoped cos __pmDecodeNameList passes back two related arrays
(namelist & statuslist) not just the one ... bleurgh.
cheers.
--
Nathan
1052
Description: application/shellscript
1052.out
Description: Binary data
1052.out.bad
Description: Binary data
|