On 10/16/2014 11:51 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 10/16/2014 09:57 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On 10/16/2014 10:34 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 10/16/2014 09:24 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
How about /proc/version
Well, /proc/cpuinfo is a multi-line file while /proc/version
is not. Maybe it's better to use another multi-line one which
does not change too often - like /proc/filesystems ?
That would add a little more inconsistency.
Paul's patch used /proc/version elsewhere (which I just noticed now).
Multi-line is irrelevant to this test, so I'd just use /proc/version here also.
Agreed, patch below.
Have a nice day,
Berny
From 11fe3ca5ec04528dd22cb4b8f9f47154a32d38ac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bernhard Voelker <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 12:23:04 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] tests: avoid false failure when comparing /proc files
At least the MHz number in /proc/cpuinfo may change, thus leading to
a false positive failure when comparing the expected against the
actual output file. Use an invariant file instead: /proc/version.
* tests/misc/head-c.sh: s/cpuinfo/version/
---
tests/misc/head-c.sh | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tests/misc/head-c.sh b/tests/misc/head-c.sh
index 807e965..1015c22 100755
--- a/tests/misc/head-c.sh
+++ b/tests/misc/head-c.sh
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ esac
# Make sure it works on funny files in /proc and /sys.
-for file in /proc/cpuinfo /sys/kernel/profiling; do
+for file in /proc/version /sys/kernel/profiling; do
if test -r $file; then
cp -f $file copy &&
head -c -1 copy > exp1 || framework_failure_
--
1.8.4.5
