Re: [Libguestfs] [PATCH 3/6] v2v:test:win: actually check the eventual layout

On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 03:19:21PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > On Monday 05 October 2015 16:05:54 Roman Kagan wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:50:52PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > > On Monday 05 October 2015 15:40:03 Roman Kagan wrote: > > > > +{ > > > > guestfish --ro -a $d/windows-sda -i <<EOF > > > > + trace 1 > > > > is-dir "/Program Files/Red Hat/Firstboot" > > > > is-file "/Program Files/Red Hat/Firstboot/firstboot.bat" > > > > is-dir "/Program Files/Red Hat/Firstboot/scripts" > > > > is-dir "/Windows/Drivers/VirtIO" > > > > + trace 0 > > > > EOF > > > > +} | { > > > > + ret=0 > > > > + while read r; do > > > > + [ "$r" = "true" ] || ret=1 > > > > + done > > > > + exit $ret > > > > +} > > > > > > Note we have tests that check the output of guestfish -- for example, > > > fish/test-edit.sh (it is not the only one). I guess you could turn this > > > test to do the same, which could be also easier to expand if there will > > > be added more commands that output things different than "true". > > > > Yes I have seen it but exactly because I foresee nothing but "true" in > > guestfish's output I want to avoid tedious beancounting when maintaining > > the expected result string. > > Never say never... really, better make it slightly more generic, so > expanding it later is no hassle. It sure is. E.g. in another patch in the series I add more is-file commands here, and I generate them with a shell "for" loop; a constant string for the expected reply with a dozen of "true" lines would look weird IMO.

> Also, comparing to the exact output expected is a check more that we > got the number of lines expected. This is rather a check for guestfish which we assume already tested here.