On 03/08/2012 10:23 PM, Chris Evich wrote: > On 03/08/2012 01:33 AM, Alex Jia wrote: >> On 03/08/2012 11:52 AM, guyanhua wrote: >>> This patch adds three test cases for "virsh capabilities" command. >>> >>> Use three cases:(1) Call virsh capabilities >>> (2) Call virsh capabilities with an unexpected option >>> (3) Call virsh capabilities with libvirtd service stop >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Gu Yanhua<[email protected]> >>> --- >>> client/tests/libvirt/tests/virsh_capabilities.py | 51 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 client/tests/libvirt/tests/virsh_capabilities.py >> How to make sure output information of virsh capabilities are correct? >> for example,<cpu>,<power management>,<topology>,<guest> XML block >> information etc. > Good point, I agree some minimal level of checking should be done. My > suggestion would be to keep it very simple, maybe use xml.dom.minidom to Chris, agree with you, we should check some important points at least. > check for the top-level tags, and call that 'good enough'. I don't > think we want to be too pedantic about checking correctness because it > could make maintenance a pain in the future. Heck, maybe just a few But, I don't think so, it's our job to ensure that virsh commands correct and available, if we can't make sure it's completely correct, for example, the current hyperviosr is xen , however, virsh capabilities says domain type='kvm' and 'qemu'. so we still need to check some important points although they probably are too pedantic :-) > regex matches would be good enough. > > guyanhua, > > Would you mind adding a very basic / minimal 'correctness' check? If > not, I can probably whip something up. Perhaps no, and hope I haven't misunderstand your meaning :-) > Thanks. >
_______________________________________________ Autotest mailing list [email protected] http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
