On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 05:08:14PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote: > There are some units within libvirt that utilize virCommand API to run > some commands and deserve own unit testing. These units are, however, > not desired to be rewritten to dig virCommand API usage out. As a great > example virNetDevBandwidth could be used. The problem with the bandwidth > unit is: it uses virComamnd API heavily. Therefore we need a mechanism > to not really run a command, but rather see its string representation > after which we can decide if the unit construct the correct sequence of > commands or not. > diff --git a/src/util/vircommand.h b/src/util/vircommand.h > index e977f93..d942c5b 100644 > --- a/src/util/vircommand.h > +++ b/src/util/vircommand.h > @@ -184,4 +184,6 @@ void virCommandAbort(virCommandPtr cmd); > void virCommandFree(virCommandPtr cmd); > > void virCommandDoAsyncIO(virCommandPtr cmd); > + > +void virCommandSetDryRun(const char *file); Do we really need to write it out to a file, or would it be simpler to just pass in a virBufferPtr instead, so we just write to RAM. This avoids any tmpfile naming complexity in code using this. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list