[PATCH] Extend testsuite - added small test

Robin Hack rhack at redhat.com
Mon Feb 22 12:34:57 UTC 2016


Thank you for your feedback.

I would like to answer some questions:
1) create new client env by copy files around:
Yeah. It's based on Uri's patch proposed here:
And after what I read discussion it's seems like not that nice idea
for this kind of test.

2) use of --option= argument:
It seems it doesn't work for me. It starts to fail in maptoguest case...

Maybe I really should create new clean env for test(s).

What do you think?


On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Uri Simchoni <uri at samba.org> wrote:
> On 02/16/2016 05:51 PM, Michael Adam wrote:
>> Hi Robin,
>> Thanks a lot for continuing to work on the test cases!
>> This is highly appreciated.
>> A few comments:
>> Not sure if it's only me, but in newly added shell script
>> code, we seem to
>> - prefer $(...) over `...` .
>> - prefer ${VARNAME} over $VARNAME
>> On the conceptual side, it seems strange to me that the test case
>> would modify the client config into a temporary working
>> directory each time. That sounds rather like we would expect
>> a special environment for this.
>> I am not sure if there is a precedent for this in other test
>> cases, and I don't have an alternative quick approach ready,
>> but ... dunno ... it feels awkward and kind of arbitrary and
>> fragile to have this in the test case itself.
>> Any other opinions / advice on this?
>> Thanks - Michael
> I'm not sure that's even necessary - isn't it possible to use
> --option=xx=yy?
> (compare that with my recently withdrawn patch that created another client
> env, not unlike this patch, but because the test modified secrets.tdb. Here
> it seems like the env is simply in order to run smbclient with different
> parameters).
> Thanks,
> Uri

More information about the samba-technical mailing list