NetBSD-Bugs archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: misc/45038: lack of tests options

The following reply was made to PR misc/45038; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Nicolas Joly <>
To: Julio Merino <>
Cc: Nicolas Joly <>,,,,,
Subject: Re: misc/45038: lack of tests options
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:12:52 +0200

 On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 04:01:12PM +0100, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
 > On 6/16/11 3:52 PM, Nicolas Joly wrote:
 > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 02:44:21PM +0100, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
 > >>
 > >> Also document the unprivileged_user option.  It's used explicitly by
 > >> some tests.  (It defaults to _atf.)
 > > 
 > > I don't find it anywhere. Is it "require.user" = "unprivileged" ? 
 > Ah sorry, it's unprivileged-user.
 Got it.
 > > IMHO, we should only document in tests(7) the configuration variables
 > > which are not part of ATF.
 > Well, I guess this one is a bit of a compromise.  unprivileged-user
 > was _not_ an atf-specific variable; it used to be defined by NetBSD
 > only.  These days, it has a special meaning in atf itself, but some
 > NetBSD tests query it directly to do their own stuff.  In other
 > words, it is not only used by require.user=unprivileged, but also to
 > perform some specific actions in the tmpfs tests.
 I'll have a look, and add it.
 Nicolas Joly
 Projects and Developments in Bioinformatics
 Institut Pasteur, Paris.

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index