Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 1/9] tests: Run test-wrap-argv with REGENERATE_OUTPUT

On 01/28/2016 03:30 PM, Cole Robinson wrote: > To get properly wrapped output > --- > tests/testutils.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tests/testutils.c b/tests/testutils.c > index b587f83..10c26648 100644 > --- a/tests/testutils.c > +++ b/tests/testutils.c > @@ -433,6 +433,32 @@ virtTestCaptureProgramOutput(const char *const argv[] > ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, > } > #endif /* !WIN32 */ > +static int > +virTestRewrapFile(const char *filename) > +{ > + int ret = -1; > + char *outbuf = NULL; > + char *script = NULL; > + virCommandPtr cmd = NULL; > + > + if (virAsprintf(&script, "%s/test-wrap-argv.pl", abs_srcdir) < 0) > + goto cleanup; > + > + cmd = virCommandNewArgList(script, filename, NULL); > + virCommandSetOutputBuffer(cmd, &outbuf); > + if (virCommandRun(cmd, NULL) < 0) > + goto cleanup; > + > + if (virFileWriteStr(filename, outbuf, 0666) < 0) > + goto cleanup; > + > + ret = 0; > + cleanup: > + VIR_FREE(script); > + virCommandFree(cmd); > + VIR_FREE(outbuf); > + return ret; > +} > /** > * @param stream: output stream to write differences to > @@ -470,17 +496,15 @@ virtTestDifferenceFullInternal(FILE *stream, > actualEnd = actual + (strlen(actual)-1); > if (expectName && regenerate && (virTestGetRegenerate() > 0)) { > - char *regencontent; > - > - /* Try to properly indent qemu argv files */ > - if (!(regencontent = virStringReplace(actual, " -", " \\\n-"))) > + if (virFileWriteStr(expectName, actual, 0666) < 0) { I always get nervous when I see 666 instead of 644 (even though the user's umask is probably going to trim that back to at least 644 anyway). Any reason for doing that?

> + virDispatchError(NULL); > return -1; > + } > - if (virFileWriteStr(expectName, regencontent, 0666) < 0) { > - VIR_FREE(regencontent); > + if (virTestRewrapFile(expectName) < 0) { > + virDispatchError(NULL); > return -1; > } > - VIR_FREE(regencontent); > } > if (!virTestGetDebug()) A bit inefficient to write the file only to re-read/re-write it, but it does guarantee you'll get exactly what you want, and isn't done very often so peak efficiency isn't really an issue :-) ACK.