Re: [PATCH v2] testsuite: Initial Avocado test implementation

[Baurzhan Ismagulov <ibr@radix50.net>]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:34:27AM +0200, Henning Schild wrote:
> I would suggest to remove that again and feed it back to reviewing. The
> content is hardly reviewed because the first round was lacking basic
> things like a commit message.

The commit message issue was commented upon and addressed. Questions were
answered. If you have further feedback, we'd like to discuss it. I don't see
any point in moving backwards.


> > > +    parser.add_argument('-d', '--distro', choices=['jessie',
> > > 'stretch'], help='set isar Debian distribution.', default='stretch')
> 
> When rewriting we should take the chance and call these guys "suites"
> not "distros".

According to e.g. sources.list(5), "The distribution is generally a suite name
like stable or testing or a codename like stretch or buster".

I agree that the existing code uses distro and suite interchangably. Our users
work with codenames, since suites change with time. So, I think "suite" would
not be appropriate for this particular case. I also tend to call it "distro",
it happens to apply 99% of the time and is much more intuitive for non-Debian
people. So, in this case I'd support "distro", although it might not be
absolutely correct in some rare cases.


> > > +        output_file = '/tmp/vm_boot_test.log'
> > > +        if os.path.exists(output_file):
> > > +            os.remove(output_file)
> 
> Do these tests run in parrallel? If so we need a file for every run.
> Even if not "tempfile" might be the way to go.

I agree, tempfile is better even without concurrency. We'll provide a patch.


With kind regards,
Baurzhan.