On 2/24/20 6:15 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 12.10.19 01:39, John Snow wrote:
>> Just caught up with the discussion.
>>
>> It looks like Thomas took my 1/5; so I'll respin on top of his "[PATCH
>> 0/5] Enable more iotests during "make check-block" series to catch those
>> improvements as they
On 12.10.19 01:39, John Snow wrote:
> Just caught up with the discussion.
>
> It looks like Thomas took my 1/5; so I'll respin on top of his "[PATCH
> 0/5] Enable more iotests during "make check-block" series to catch those
> improvements as they stand.
Any updates on this? :)
Max
On 10/4/19 11:39 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 18.09.19 01:45, John Snow wrote:
>> This series uses python logging to enable output conditionally on
>> iotests.log(). We unify an initialization call (which also enables
>> debugging output for those tests with -d) and then make the switch
>> inside
On 18.09.19 01:45, John Snow wrote:
> This series uses python logging to enable output conditionally on
> iotests.log(). We unify an initialization call (which also enables
> debugging output for those tests with -d) and then make the switch
> inside of iotests.
>
> It will help alleviate the
This series uses python logging to enable output conditionally on
iotests.log(). We unify an initialization call (which also enables
debugging output for those tests with -d) and then make the switch
inside of iotests.
It will help alleviate the need to create logged/unlogged versions
of all the
