On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 10:01 -0800, John Admanski wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Eric Li(李咏竹) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Agree, in a failure scenario, run test in verbose mode and you will get the > > ssh command. > > Then you would have to copy paste the ssh command and retry. > > If the "-q" patch was pushed in, you had to remove the -q option in order to > > see what warn/error messages are from the ssh command. > > > > Its not a perfect working scenario. I am ok with it, but I respect some > > other people might not be ok with it. > > I don't like the idea of automatically re-running a command that > actually does something; for example if the command is launching the > autotest client and the connection gets killed for some reason or > another, we don't necessarily want to be running that command again.
True. > The failures mentioned here so far all talk about failures which occur > when establishing the connection, but it's also possible to get ssh > errors (i.e. exit status 255 errors) after the remote command has been > launched; so it's quite possible we could actually be running the > remote command multiple times. > > It would probably be safer to run something like "true" in verbose > mode. If the problem is a non-transient one involving the > establishment of the connection then you would still get the logs you > need. Yes, that's much better, running true on the remote host would give all debug info needed, agree. _______________________________________________ Autotest mailing list [email protected] http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
