Re: [PATCH] Testbeds for libudev/gudev clients

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Martin Pitt <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello Lucas,
>
> Lucas De Marchi [2012-07-09 16:54 -0300]:
>> You might want to look into kmod's testsuite. We do exactly that and
>> until there's a better alternative I plan to support this for newer
>> glibcs.
>
> Thanks for pointing out! I'll do that. When it fails with a newer
> glibc, we should get test case failures and thus it should be rather
> obvious where things need fixing.
>
> I guess that still means we'd either need a libudev-test.so or a shell
> wrapper and the libpath.so thing around all tests, and thus
> build/ship the two as part of a libudev install. That's something
> which I considered to be more ugly, but if Kay prefers that, I'll look
> into this.

It's part of my "make check" running the testsuite.

>
>> When I implemented that I tried what you are trying now and it didn't
>> look right and it's ugly to touch all the calls with path strings and
>> also very error prone.
>
> libudev already has something like that, it has the TEST_PREFIX macro
> everywhere. So I don't think it's actually getting much worse, but
> with a preloaded library we wouldn't need the TEST_PREFIX thing any
> more either.
>
> So the trade is "add the get_prefix() calls to the path name build
> calls" vs. "maintain/build/install a preload library".

I never ever install that, and doing so is just wrong IMO. Just make
it part of the "make check". The final user is not supposed to be
running a testsuite.


Lucas De Marchi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html