|
On 07/22/2014 04:35 PM, Luis Pabón
wrote:
I
understand that when something is new and different, it is most
likely blamed for anything wrong that happens. I highly propose
that we do not do this, and instead work to learn more about the
tool.
Cmockery2 is a tool that is important as the compiler. It
provides an extremely easy method to determine the quality of the
software after it has been constructed, and therefore it has been
made to be a requirement of the build. Making it optional
undermines its importance, and could in turn make it useless.
Hey Luis,
Th intention was not to undermine or give less importance to
Cmockery2. Sorry if it looked like that.
However I was thinking from a flexibility point of view. I am
assuming in future, it would be part of upstream regression test
suite. So each patch will go through full unit testing by-default.
So when somebody is creating RPMs from
pristine sources, we should be able to do that without Cmockery2
because the tests were already ran through Jenkins/gerrit.
The question is do we need Cmockery every-time we compile glusterfs
source? if the answer is yes, then I am fine with current code.
Cmockery2
is available for all supported EPEL/Fedora versions. For any
other distribution or operating system, it takes about 3 mins to
download and compile.
Please let me know if you have any other questions.
- Luis
On 07/22/2014 02:23 AM, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote:
On 07/21/2014 10:48 PM, Harshavardhana
wrote:
Cmockery2 is a hard dependency before
GlusterFS can be compiled in
upstream master now - we could make it conditional
and enable if necessary? since we know we do not have the
cmockery2
packages available on all systems?
+1, we need to make it conditional and enable it if necessary.
I am also not sure if we have "cmockery2-devel" in el5, el6. If
not Build will fail.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Luis
Pabon <lpabon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Niels you are correct. Let me take a
look.
Luis
-----Original Message-----
From: Niels de Vos [ndevos@xxxxxxxxxx]
Received: Monday, 21 Jul 2014, 10:41AM
To: Luis Pabon [lpabon@xxxxxxxxxx]
CC: Anders Blomdell [anders.blomdell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx];
gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Cmockery2 in GlusterFS
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 04:27:18PM +0200, Anders Blomdell
wrote:
On 2014-07-21 16:17, Anders Blomdell
wrote:
On 2014-07-20 16:01, Niels de Vos
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at
02:52:18PM -0400, Luis Pabón wrote:
Hi all,
A few months ago, the unit test framework based
on cmockery2 was
in the repo for a little while, then removed while
we improved the
packaging method. Now support for cmockery2 (
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/7538/ ) has been
merged into the repo
again. This will most likely require you to install
cmockery2 on
your development systems by doing the following:
* Fedora/EPEL:
$ sudo yum -y install cmockery2-devel
* All other systems please visit the following page:
https://github.com/lpabon/cmockery2/blob/master/doc/usage.md#installation
Here is also some information about Cmockery2 and
how to use it:
* Introduction to Unit Tests in C Presentation:
http://slides-lpabon.rhcloud.com/feb24_glusterfs_unittest.html#/
* Cmockery2 Usage Guide:
https://github.com/lpabon/cmockery2/blob/master/doc/usage.md
* Using Cmockery2 with GlusterFS:
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/doc/hacker-guide/en-US/markdown/unittest.md
When starting out writing unit tests, I would
suggest writing unit
tests for non-xlator interface files when you start.
Once you feel
more comfortable writing unit tests, then move to
writing them for
the xlators interface files.
Awesome, many thanks! I'd like to add some unittests
for the RPC and
NFS
layer. Several functions (like ip-address/netmask
matching for ACLs)
look very suitable.
Did you have any particular functions in mind that you
would like to
see
unittests for? If so, maybe you can file some bugs for
the different
tests so that we won't forget about it? Depending on
the tests, these
bugs may get the EasyFix keyword if there is a clear
description and
some pointers to examples.
Looks like parts of cmockery was forgotten in
glusterfs.spec.in:
# rpm -q -f `which gluster`
glusterfs-cli-3.7dev-0.9.git5b8de97.fc20.x86_64
# ldd `which gluster`
linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x00007ffff4dfe000)
libglusterfs.so.0 => /lib64/libglusterfs.so.0
(0x00007fe034cc4000)
libreadline.so.6 => /lib64/libreadline.so.6
(0x00007fe034a7d000)
libncurses.so.5 => /lib64/libncurses.so.5
(0x00007fe034856000)
libtinfo.so.5 => /lib64/libtinfo.so.5
(0x00007fe03462c000)
libgfxdr.so.0 => /lib64/libgfxdr.so.0
(0x00007fe034414000)
libgfrpc.so.0 => /lib64/libgfrpc.so.0
(0x00007fe0341f8000)
libxml2.so.2 => /lib64/libxml2.so.2
(0x00007fe033e8f000)
libz.so.1 => /lib64/libz.so.1
(0x00007fe033c79000)
libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6
(0x00007fe033971000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2
(0x00007fe03376d000)
libcmockery.so.0 => not found
libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0
(0x00007fe03354f000)
libcrypto.so.10 => /lib64/libcrypto.so.10
(0x00007fe033168000)
libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6
(0x00007fe032da9000)
libcmockery.so.0 => not found
libcmockery.so.0 => not found
libcmockery.so.0 => not found
liblzma.so.5 => /lib64/liblzma.so.5
(0x00007fe032b82000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fe0351f1000)
Should I file a bug report or could someone on the
fast-lane fix this?
My bad (installation with --nodeps --force :-()
Actually, I was not expecting a dependency on cmockery2. My
understanding was that only some temporary test-applications
would be
linked with libcmockery and not any binaries that would get
packaged in
the RPMs.
Luis, could you clarify that?
Thanks,
Niels
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
|
