Re: [PATCH i-g-t 2/5] lib/tests: don't use hard error status to indicate test failure

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 11:31:02AM +0000, Thomas Wood wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  lib/tests/igt_command_line.sh | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/tests/igt_command_line.sh b/lib/tests/igt_command_line.sh
> index 7e6ca67..5cf2584 100755
> --- a/lib/tests/igt_command_line.sh
> +++ b/lib/tests/igt_command_line.sh
> @@ -48,20 +48,20 @@ for test in $TESTLIST; do
>  
>  	# check invalid option handling
>  	echo "  Checking invalid option handling..."
> -	./$test --invalid-option 2> /dev/null && exit 99
> +	./$test --invalid-option 2> /dev/null && exit 1

Just a curious question: What's better with hardcoding 1 than hardcoding
99? Otherwise series lgtm.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx





[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux