On 02.01.2017 12:04, Martin Kletzander wrote:
On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 09:57:04AM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-01-01 at 12:35 +0400, Roman Bogorodskiy wrote:
>> > No rush, I see Michal has yet another proposal for this that we
>> haven't
>> > considered and even though there are somedrawbacks to that as well, it
>> > looks nicer than this.
>> >
>> > After all the ideas I'm starting to like the "gross" one the
best. Oh
>> > my =)
>>
>> My vote still goes to this solution, because having a placeholder seems
>> more explicit and easier to follow than doing s/lo/lo0/ directly.
>
> I vote for Michal's approach as it doesn't require us to
> disable VIR_TEST_REGENERATE_OUTPUT.
>
Well, it does. Kinda. You *must not* regenerate output on FreeBSD with
his patch, so it should be explicitly disabled.
Really? I think it works well even if you do regenerate output there. I
mean, my patch fixes the output of the actual configuration, so that it
will always contain 'lo' instead of 'lo0'. And test output regeneration
is done after that. With 'lo'.
Michal