On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 01:42:17PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote: > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 03:05:12PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > What do you think about renaming the existing tests from NNN to > > NNN-descriptive-name? That way it will be easier for people who are > > trying to track regressions, since they can easily map from the new > > more descriptive name to the old test number for comparison purposes > > (i.e., to see whether a failure is a regression or not, etc.) > > It does seem like a good idea to help people map from descriptive names > to their previous numeric file names. > > But do we want to bake it in to the file names forevermore? Would it be > good enough to start the old tests with something like > > _was_test_nr 45 $ cd tests/generic $ ../../lsqa.pl -b 001 Random file copier to produce chains of identical files so the head and the tail can be diff'd at the end of each iteration. Exercises creat, write and unlink for a variety of directory sizes, and checks for data corruption. run [config] config has one line per file with filename and byte size, else use the default one below. $ ../../lsqa.pl -b 005 Test symlinks & ELOOP $ Do we even really need to change them? Fix the lsqa.pl script be able to take a directory argument, and just use the script to get the description.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
