On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 12:28:19PM +0100, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Sami Kerola <kerolasa@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Coverage of these tests is not magnificent. None of the communications
> > to external systems using tcp, udp, or to journald are tested, but at
> > least some aspects of the logger(1) functionality gets to be checked -
> > that is message formats and input validation.
>
>
> ah! excellent. I'll also have a look to understand the nature of how
> tests work for util-linux. Regarding tcp and udp: I guess a simple way
> would be to use netcat? Or is that considered bad practice for
> util-linux (as versions may differ and may interfere with test
> results?
We have no any strict policy for tests, it's fine to check all
necessary environment and versions and skip (ts_skip function) all
the test if necessary.
We have two basic modes:
* "non-root" (make check) - this is usually for simple tests where you
don't need root permissions and where is it safe to call the test
on arbitrary machine (to make it usable for example from spec
files on build machines, etc.)
* "root" - this is for dangerous tests you never want to call on
production system, it's never executed by build system and you
have to manually "cd tests; ./run.sh". This is for example for
mount(8), some fdisk tests etc. These tests are for developers
only.
Note I have just committed a new --no-act logger command line option
to make it possible to check messages formatting without spam in
system logs, for example:
$ logger --no-act --stderr --rfc5424 "This is message"
I guess we can use it for messages formatting tests (as the tests
suggested by Sami).
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
