On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:18:59PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 11/7/13, 2:46 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > For historical reasons beyond my knowledge xfstests tries to abuse the > > scratch device as test device for nfs and udf. Because not all test > > have inherited the right usage of the _setup_testdir and _cleanup_testdir > > helpers this leads to lots of unessecary test failures. > > > > Remove the special casing, which gets nfs down to a minimal number of > > failures. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > Oof, that was a lot of cruft. Were you able to run UDF tests with > these changes? I wonder if Jan is using this for UDF? I didn't bother testing udf, but it's just another block based filesystem, so unlike NFS I didn't expect breakage. Let me give it a spin.. > (I don't have the UDF verifier that many(/all?) of the UDF tests > require). Last time I did run xfstests on UDF it wasn't required, just an additional tool to verify the fs consistency. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
