On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 4:07 AM Rob Landley <r...@landley.net> wrote: > > > > On 2/10/23 07:33, Eric Molitor wrote: > > Actually you were spot on with your feedback. I also checked with e2fsprogs, > > util-linux and busy box blkid and this is the most consistent ordering of > > output > > for SEC_TYPE. > > > > - Eric > > --- > > tests/blkid.test | 2 +- > > toys/other/blkid.c | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tests/blkid.test b/tests/blkid.test > > index 4c385dcb..7e625492 100755 > > --- a/tests/blkid.test > > +++ b/tests/blkid.test > > @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ testing "f2fs" "BLKID f2fs" \ > > 'temp.img: LABEL="myf2fs" UUID="b53d3619-c204-4c0b-8504-36363578491c" > > TYPE="f2fs"\n' \ > > "" "" > > testing "iso" "BLKID iso" \ > > - 'temp.img: SEC_TYPE="msdos" LABEL="MYISO" UUID="1970-01-02-12-55-42-00" > > TYPE="iso9660"\n' \ > > + 'temp.img: LABEL="MYISO" UUID="1970-01-02-12-55-42-00" TYPE="iso9660"\n' > > \ > > "" "" > > My TEST_HOST on devuan is doing UUID= before LABEL= for isofs. No idea why? > > --- expected 2023-02-11 05:59:58.915956238 -0600 > +++ actual 2023-02-11 05:59:58.923956238 -0600 > @@ -1 +1 @@ > -temp.img: LABEL="CDROM" UUID="2023-02-08-04-47-27-00" TYPE="iso9660" > +temp.img: UUID="2023-02-08-04-47-27-00" LABEL="CDROM" TYPE="iso9660" > > Let's see what gentoo is doing... doesn't make it that far because it says > BLOCK_SIZE=1024 for ext2. Of course. (util-linux 2.33 vs 2.38.) > > Right VERBOSE=all and... well, the weird "cdrom reports fields in reverse > order > except TYPE= is still at the end" remains true, but the new util-linux version > added BLOCK_SIZE to most things, and a redundant looking LABEL_FATBOOT to > msdos > and vfat. > > I'm going to check in a wild guess at "currently least wrong", and throw the > iso > image I made on ancient knoppix into the test file dir so it has something to > pass against for the moment so I can push stuff without obviously breaking > make > tests. > > And then go BACK to trying to finish the shell read builtin instead of > diverging > into adding BLOCK_SIZE just now. (NO idea how to genericize that across > different filesystems, unless maybe they're consistent about storing it as a > 1<<SIZE value?) > > Rob > > P.S. Would running the output through: > > sed 's/" \([A-Z]\)/"\n\1/g' | sort | xargs > > be cheating? Mine producing fields in a consistent order and util-linux NOT > doing so is a divergence, but I don't think it's necessarily a _bug_?
iirc that was my suggestion last time this came up... afaict, upstream doesn't really care about ordering (because they're assuming these are being interpreted as assignments by something that itself doesn't care), and it does just change over time. > P.P.S. What _is_ LABEL_FATBOOT anyway? > _______________________________________________ > Toybox mailing list > Toybox@lists.landley.net > http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list Toybox@lists.landley.net http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
