autoconf-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: parallel autotest [1/3]: Refactor testsuite driver loop.


From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: parallel autotest [1/3]: Refactor testsuite driver loop.
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 21:27:41 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

* Eric Blake wrote on Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 04:19:34AM CEST:
> According to Ralf Wildenhues on 6/17/2008 3:08 PM:
> |
> | +at_pass_list=`for f in */pass; do echo $f; done | sed '/*/d; s,/pass,,'`
> | +at_skip_list=`for f in */skip; do echo $f; done | sed '/*/d; s,/skip,,'`
> | +at_xfail_list=`for f in */xfail; do echo $f; done | sed '/*/d; s,/xfail,,'`
> | +at_xpass_list=`for f in ?/xpass ??/xpass ???/xpass ????/xpass; do
> | +            echo $f; done | sed '/?/d; s,/xpass,,'`
>
> Why the inconsistency between */pass and ?/xpass?

Because we output the xpass list, and it should be ordered, to have
  11 2 3 failed, 10 4 5 passed unexpectedly

rather than
  2 3 11 failed, 4 5 10 passed unexpectedly

in the summary.  I didn't bother fixing those variables which we do not
output; the question mark patterns are more, thus incur higher overhead.

> Also, are '/*/' and
> '/?/' portable patterns in sed, since those are regex metacharacters, or
> do we need to play it safe and use '/\*/' and '/\?/'?

The '*' is special and needs escaping, fixed now, and pushed.  I have no
idea how I could have overlooked that, but it seems that GNU and BSD sed
do not interpret it as special when it's the first regex token.  '?' is
not special.

Thanks for the review!

Cheers,
Ralf




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]