On Jul 3 10:19, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Nate Straz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jun 18 10:26, Garrett Cooper wrote: > >> After running a few checks it appears that the -m and the non-m > >> functions were doing the same exact thing in lib/tst_res.c (at least > >> in the April and May snapshots of ltp-full). This patch fixes the > >> behavior so tst_resm and tst_res no longer do the same thing (output > >> to stdout only), but instead (like the manpage says and the original > >> intention was): > >> > >> tst_resm: > >> - Output in deterministic way, depending on input parameters provided. > >> > >> tst_res > >> - Do same thing as tst_resm, but output to file specified (and > >> stdout), or just stdout if file == NULL. > > > > Which man page did you pull these from? That's not correct at all. > > > > I see in ltp/doc/man3/tst_res.3: > > > > tst_res - Print result message, including file contents > > > > tst_resm - Print result message > > > > -1 to the patch. > > Ok... based on the manpage description that's what I was originally > thinking, but then I got off on a wild tangent, thinking "THIS MUST BE > THE WAY!" (in a conquistador fashion 8-)..). > > Is there a specific use-case where that type of function behavior is > desired instead of just using tst_resm's behavior? I see a lot of code > in the syscalls portion of the tree at least, like so: > > tst_res(TBROK, NULL, ...)
I could only guess that they wanted to print the contents of a file which was previously output by tst_res(), but I don't think that's how it is supposed to work. I think those cases can be safely converted to use tst_resm(). > so, maybe the purpose of tst_resm vs tst_res needs to be better > clarified in the manpages? I guess so. For the record, tst_res() is for including the contents of a temporary file in your results. tst_resm() is for just printing a message. > PS As a sidenote it would be really snazzy if someone could stick the > manpages up online, similar to what FreeBSD does: > <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi>. Not a critical point, but > definitely helpful functionality, and helpful when providing a > reference to people =). That sounds reasonable, but then we should really write more man pages. :) Nate ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW! Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project, along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08 _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
