On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Evgeny Kotkov <evgeny.kotkov_at_visualsvn.com
> wrote:
> Stefan Fuhrmann <stefan2_at_apache.org> writes:
>
> > static svn_error_t *
> > -test_fsfs_config_opts(const svn_test_opts_t *opts,
> > - apr_pool_t *pool)
> > +test_create_with_config_opts(const svn_test_opts_t *opts,
> > + apr_pool_t *pool)
> > {
> > apr_hash_t *fs_config;
> > svn_fs_t *fs;
> > @@ -6722,9 +6722,9 @@ test_fsfs_config_opts(const svn_test_opt
> > const svn_fs_fsfs_info_t *fsfs_info;
> >
> > /* Bail (with SKIP) on known-untestable scenarios */
> > - if (strcmp(opts->fs_type, "fsfs") != 0)
> > + if (strcmp(opts->fs_type, SVN_FS_TYPE_BDB) == 0)
> > return svn_error_create(SVN_ERR_TEST_SKIPPED, NULL,
> > - "this will test FSFS repositories only");
> > + "this will not test BDB repositories");
>
> Is there a reason to run this test with --fs-type=fsx? I think we'd be
> just
> wasting time here, because the test itself doesn't rely on opts->fs_type,
> and everything it does is FSFS-specific.
>
> When creating file systems in this test, we specify SVN_FS_TYPE_FSFS and
> FSFS-specific config options; when checking what we've got, we downcast the
> information structure to an FSFS-specific svn_fs_fsfs_info_t. I think
> that the
> test was designed to run only with --fs-type=fsfs.
>
You are right, I missed that it is hard-coded to use FSFS.
Reverted to FSFS-only execution in r1668117.
I simply wanted to remove as many fs type restrictions
as possible, i.e. maximize coverage, w/o making the test
fail.
Am I missing something?
>
Tests that are truly backend-specific should go into the
respective libsvn_fs_* folder. There is also a bit of test
duplication between FSFS and FSX there that should be
moved to FS. When I find time & energy, I might sort
that out for 1.10. Patches are welcome.
-- Stefan^2.
Received on 2015-03-20 20:08:21 CET