On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Gawlas, Julius <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lucas,
>
> Sorry for the noise, but I think I put this the patch in the wrong branch, I 
> think I fixed it now and the commit is on next in my fork at 
> https://github.com/juliusgawlas/autotest/commit/cc9e0a82a59318a983430590b00c6a3770b18a8b

Sure, I found the patch and I'm looking into it, will give some
feedback soon (I hope).

Thanks!

> thanks
> Julius
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gawlas, Julius
> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 3:54 PM
> To: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues
> Cc: autotest-kernel; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Virt-test-devel] [Autotest] Stupid, Simple, update_autotest 
> bash Script
>
> Lucas,
>
>>I'd like to see your changes, but overall, if we can make this work cleanly, 
>>I'm all for it.
>
> Apologies for the delay, I think I have put changes that I was working on in 
> https://github.com/juliusgawlas/autotest. (Hopefully I got this right, I am a 
> github beginner)
>
> The intended setup is:
> - Autotest running from /usr/local/autotest
> - client tests in /usr/local/tests/client (git clone of the 
> autotest-client-tests)
> - server tests in /usr/local/tests/server
> - in global_config.ini added
> [COMMON]
> test_dir: /usr/local/tests/server,/usr/local/tests/client
>
> Summary of changes:
>     test.py - allow for multiple dirs in test_dir
>     control_file.py - use additional dirs when searching for control
>     autotest_remote.py - support to tar tests from additional dirs
>     test_importer.py - fail if specified tests are not in relative path
>
> The changes seem rather straightforward but I am probably missing some other 
> use cases.
>
> Does that seem like a reasonable path to follow?
>
> Julius
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 5:59 AM
> To: Gawlas, Julius
> Cc: Chris Evich; [email protected]; autotest-kernel
> Subject: Re: [Virt-test-devel] [Autotest] Stupid, Simple, update_autotest 
> bash Script
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Gawlas, Julius <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>> After the split of core from the tests I wanted a simple setup where tests 
>> are residing outside of core autotest directory. Say autotest would reside 
>> in /usr/local/autotest and testware in /usr/local/autotest-tests/client and 
>> /usr/local/autotest-tests/server (of course one could have git clones in 
>> these directories). Additionally, in our setup this would be great because 
>> it facilitates division between testers developing testware and autotest 
>> core. It would also avoid nested repos and all repos would be treated as 
>> independent.
>
> Yep, it's a great goal.
>
>> There is a global config variable that seems to help having tests in 
>> separate directory [COMMON] test_dir. However setting it does not have 
>> desired effect - it turns out that in several places autotest assumes that 
>> tests will be inside autotest.
>
> test_dir is one of the many hack, I mean, changes, we had to do to support 
> autotest installed system wide. Indeed there are more changes needed to make 
> it all work for the autotest server pushing clients to a client.
>
>> I went ahead and changed logic to use that variable when control file is 
>> fetched from the disk and when tests are passed to the client. Got this 
>> mostly working but before I go much further wanted to get some opinions if 
>> this is the right approach. Perhaps there is simpler way to accomplish that 
>> or perhaps test_dir was not meant to be used in that context.
>
> So, test_dir was developed mostly for people running autotest-local 
> standalone, and for that use case, it works well. However, for the 
> aforementioned use case, where you use autotest-remote to push stuff to a 
> client, this is still not working (I made a lot of changes to at least allow 
> running autotest-remote properly on a system wide install). I'd like to see 
> your changes, but overall, if we can make this work cleanly, I'm all for it.
>
> The packaging work introduced another use case and a whole new set of 
> constraints we have to keep testing and supporting... sigh.
>
> --
> Lucas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Virt-test-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-test-devel



-- 
Lucas

_______________________________________________
Autotest-kernel mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/autotest-kernel

Reply via email to