[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Jarc) wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> * tests/rm/fail-2eperm: Now that we have setuidgid, use it in >> place of the kludge in this test. > > How about also using this to run the non-root-only tests when "make > check" runs as root?
That was the goal. But it was nontrivial since I wanted to avoid having to change each of the 20+ affected tests. I've changed priv-check to run exec setuidgid $NON_ROOT_USERNAME $0 in the require-non-root/UID=0 case. A drawback with this approach is that it requires that the user, $NON_ROOT_USERNAME, have write access to each of the test directories -- in order to create each per-test subdirectory. But imho, that's not too onerous. I usually unpack/build/test as a non-privileged user, then run `sudo make check'. With this change, I'd run `sudo env NON_ROOT_USERNAME=$USER make check'. > BTW, why are there three different ways of reporting this? > > ./fail-perm: NOTICE: This test case cannot be run as root. > fail-eperm: you may not run this test as root; skipping it. > ./no-x: This test is being skipped, since it works only > when run by an unprivileged user. Because I didn't notice the duplication :-) I've fixed them all to use the same code. Thanks! _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
