On 09/14/2012 09:51 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:49:29AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 09/14/2012 09:20 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange(a)redhat.com>
>>
>> Several test cases were mistakenly raising errors due to the
>> QEMU_CAPS_KVM flag being missed.
>> ---
>> tests/qemuxml2argvtest.c | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>
>> +++ b/tests/qemuxml2argvtest.c
>> @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ mymain(void)
>> DO_TEST("minimal", QEMU_CAPS_NAME);
>> DO_TEST("minimal-s390", QEMU_CAPS_NAME);
>> DO_TEST("machine-aliases1", NONE);
>> - DO_TEST_ERROR("machine-aliases2", NONE);
>> + DO_TEST("machine-aliases2", QEMU_CAPS_KVM);
>
> Should we keep both runs, to prove that the capability makes the
> difference? That is, add a new line, rather than replacing an existing
> line.
No the old code was just completely bogus, based on bugs
previously introduced in the test suite, since this particular
case was first written.
Fair enough. ACK.
--
Eric Blake eblake(a)redhat.com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library
http://libvirt.org