On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Michael Rubin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Akshay Lal <[email protected]> wrote: >> Well previously, when the fsck ran on an unmounted file system and the file >> system was dirty/corrupted in anyway, the fsck would throw an error (but fix >> the file system '-fy'). This error would get logged in the >> console/tests-specific log as an 'ERROR', but the overall test would pass. >> Thats not really very non-intuitive and not correct (either) since you >> ideally want the file system in a clean state after all the tests run. >> Explicitly stating that a failure in an fsck run results in a test failure >> seems like the right approach - I think. > > Is there any disagreement on this issue? > > To me it seems obvious that after testing any file system errors are > flagged as failures. When would that not be the case?
I'm still stuck on whether we should be raising TestError outside of a test, and why the groups code doesn't seem to be working as intended. Any thrown error should turn into a TestError inside a test, AFAICS _______________________________________________ Autotest mailing list [email protected] http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
