[PATCH] Re: ldb cmocka tests
abartlet at samba.org
Wed Apr 12 01:35:05 UTC 2017
On Mon, 2017-04-10 at 12:13 +0200, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Monday, 10 April 2017 00:26:06 CEST Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 11:11 +0200, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> > > On Friday, 7 April 2017 05:18:02 CEST Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > > > > Can you look at this cmocka test for me? I've been writing
> > > > > one
> > > > > to
> > > > > show
> > > > > the ldb_tdb locking bug in the other thread. I like cmocka!
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure what the correct interaction with fork() is
> > > > > meant to
> > > > > be,
> > > > > but I've made this work for now.
> > >
> > > The test looks fine. I think the original idea of the file is to
> > > test
> > > the API.
> > >
> > > This test you wrote is a special case. I would put that in its
> > > own
> > > binary.
> > >
> > > The setup/teardown functions could be shared.
> > Currently we don't have a good framework for multiple tests in
> > ldb. To
> > split it out we need to create that, with a set of test names and a
> > way
> > to ensure we run them all.
> > I think we both want to get the concept of cmocka in for now, can
> > we
> > leave this for the next large test expansion?
> > Otherwise, could you show how you would like it split up by
> > splitting
> > the existing test up, so I can just follow the same pattern?
> Ok, lets first bring the patchset upstream.
> Here is a rebased version on the third_party cmocka code which is
> now. After this is upstream we can look at your additions to the ldb
> Are you OK with that?
Sadly this still fails autobuild. You we to change autobuild to allow
bundling of cmocka in samba-libs (which disables bundling, something
that was aimed at ldb/tdb/tevent), so we don't have to write 'install'
logic for it etc.
Authentication Developer, Samba Team https://samba.org
Samba Development and Support, Catalyst IT
More information about the samba-technical