2015-01-31 7:53 GMT+09:00 Rob Landley <[email protected]>:

> On 01/30/2015 01:56 AM, Yeongdeok Suh wrote:
> > Hi, all,
> >
> > When I test toybox with toybox/tests/*.test scripts,
> > I got many false FAILs from it. So, I tried to fix useradd.test file.
> > What I fixed are as below.
>
> This week has been entirely eaten by $DAYJOB having me do kernel stuff.
> I hope to catch up a bit this weekend...
>
> I appreciate your efforts:)
I fixed some thing what you said.


> > 1. I added the checking routine at the head of file whether it is run by
> > root.
> > useradd.test should be PASSed only by root user.
>
> Existing tests (ifconfig, losetup, chgrp, chown) output "SKIPPED"
> instead of FAIL. (Not running the test as root isn't a failure per say,
> it just means we couldn't perform this test in this context. That way
> when we run "make test" to test all the commands enabled in the current
> config, we don't get spurious failures.)
>
>
I fixed the "FAIL" to "SKIPPED"



> > 2. I Separated 'userdel' from 'testing' syntax.
> > in existing code,
> >
> > /testing "adduser user_name (text)" "useradd toyTestUser $arg ||/
> > /   grep '^toyTestUser:' /etc/passwd $arg && test -d /home/toyTestUser
> &&/
> > /   *userdel toyTestUser $arg && rm -rf /home/toyTestUser &&* echo
> 'yes'" \/
> > /  "yes\n" "" "$pass" /
> >
> > */userdel toyTestUser $arg && rm -rf /home/toyTestUser/* is not related
> > with useradd directly. But if userdel or rm occur error, this test case
> > is FAILed. So I moved this part out of testing syntax.
>
> It's a cleanup step, yes.
>
> > Could you share your opinion about this patch?



useradd and userdel are still in pending, in part because Android uses a
> different userlist mechanism than /etc/passwd files and I need to do
> some research on the correct way to handle that.
>
> Oddly, enh (the Android guy) sent us this patch:
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01664.html
>
> Which reaches out and touches /etc/passwd for testing chown. It's on my
> list of things to think about in a lot more depth than I've had time to
> yet.
>
>
It is good idea. But I didn't apply it to new patch.
I gonna test it on my ARM machines too.



> There are some minor hiccups with your patch (&> redirects both stdout
> and stderr, and then you redirect stderr again?) but it's better than
> what was there. I'll probably apply it this weekend. (Bured by $DAYJOB
> right now...)
>
>
Oops! I fixed them to $args ("&>/dev/null").



> > Yeongdeok
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob
>


Thanks,

Yeongdeok

Attachment: 0001-Separate-userdel-from-testing-syntax.patch
Description: Binary data

_______________________________________________
Toybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net

Reply via email to