On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:39:45AM +0100, Ruediger Meier wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 March 2015, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> > On 03/17/2015 05:34 PM, Karel Zak wrote:
> > > Maybe we need a new option to disable the evaluation of the target
> > > path elements. (--strict-target)
> >
> > Hey, we already have a tool for that: 'mountpoint' ;-)
> >
> > What's wrong with
> >
> > mountpoint "$DIR_B" >/dev/null \
> > && findmnt --target "$DIR_B" \
> > && ...
>
> Yeah! In context of that tests/ts/mount/move snippet this should be
> enough:
>
> [...]
> # move
> $TS_CMD_MOUNT --move $DIR_A $DIR_B
>
> # check the move
> $TS_CMD_MOUNTPOINT -q $DIR_B || ts_failed "Cannot find binded $DIR_B"
> [...]
>
> I still wonder why we don't check mount's return value too. Here it
> should always return 0, right?
check return code is good idea, but please still check the mountpoint
too. It's mount(8) test - we need an independent verification.
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
