Summary: IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for
more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 861
Peer Reviewer(s): Neelakanta
Pull request to: Zoran
Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.4.x, default(4.5)
Development branch: opensaf-4.4.x
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services y
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
changeset c59d3d9d25a39fd3325a3f455ac10c551f4b93ad
Author: Zoran Milinkovic <zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 16:52:30 +0200
IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for
more
strict parsing values in immcfg [#861]
For backwards compatibility, it's needed to revert the code for old way
of
parsing default values. Flag --strict is added for a more strict parsing
values, which fail immcfg if an attribute value does not match the
attribute
data type.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/tools/safimm/immcfg/imm_cfg.c | 13 +++++++++----
osaf/tools/safimm/immcfg/imm_import.cc | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------
2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
immcfg --strict -L imm.xml
immcfg -L imm.xml
immcfg --strict -f imm.xml
immcfg -f imm.xml
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Create an XML file with a class that has an attribute of integer type, and
string default value.
immcfg with new flag --strict should fail for both "-f" and "-L".
If --strict flag is missing, immcfg with "-f" and "-L" should succeed to load
and verify XML file.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Neelakanta
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 n n
powerpc n n
powerpc64 n n
Reviewer Checklist:
-------------------
[Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
that need proper data filled in.
___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
(i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
too much content into a single commit.
___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
of what has changed between each re-send.
___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc)
___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
the threaded patch review.
___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
for in-service upgradability test.
___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
