> On Sept. 16, 2016, 4:57 p.m., Sune Vuorela wrote: > > autotests/kconfigtest.cpp, line 1376 > > <https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128916/diff/4/?file=476949#file476949line1376> > > > > Isn't a QSKIP if user is root in the beginning of the test a better > > approach ? > > Gleb Popov wrote: > I think, XFAIL is better idea, because if anyone ever would want to > figure out why it is expected, it would instantly found out the cause.
XFAIL is usually for actual bugs. I'm not sure I'll consider 'how unix permissions have worked since the dawn of time' actual bugs. - Sune ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128916/#review99231 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 16, 2016, 7:17 a.m., Evgeniy Sadovnik wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128916/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 16, 2016, 7:17 a.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Frameworks and Gleb Popov. > > > Repository: kconfig > > > Description > ------- > > The test checks that saving a read-only config file fails. But because root > can write into read-only files, the test is failing when running by root. > Check for uid when running the test and make it XFAIL if we are running as > root. > > > Diffs > ----- > > autotests/kconfigtest.cpp 2b905b5 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128916/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Evgeniy Sadovnik > >
