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.
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|