On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:20:28PM +0100, Luke Diamand wrote:
> t9814 has a test that simply sets up a pre-requisite for
> another test, and as such, always succeeds. The way it was
> written doesn't quite work with the test lint checks introduced
> with the --chain-lint option.
>
> Add an additional layer of {} to prevent the --chain-lint
> code getting confused.
Thanks for looking into this. I tried to fix any existing tests I could,
but I missed ones whose prerequisites aren't met on my system.
Using {} is reasonable in general; that's how the fixes in 9ddc5ac (t:
wrap complicated expect_code users in a block, 2015-03-20) worked.
However, I think your case is somewhat simpler, in that you really just
want a big conditional to set a prereq based on whether or not a command
succeeds.
Would it make sense to convert this whole thing to just:
test_lazy_prereq P4D_HAVE_CONFIGURABLE_RUN_MOVE_ALLOW '
p4 configure show run.move.allow >out &&
egrep ^run.move.allow: out
'
?
-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html