RE: [Patch 0/5] Add exclusions for tests requiring cvs where cvs is not installed

["Randall S. Becker" <rsbecker@nexbridge.com>]

On June 13, 2019 3:07 PM, Peff wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 02:53:08PM -0400, randall.s.becker@rogers.com
> wrote:
> 
> > From: "Randall S. Becker" <rsbecker@nexbridge.com>
> >
> > t9600 to t9604 currently depend on cvs to function correctly,
> > otherwise all of those tests fail. This patch follows an existing
> > pattern of from the t9400 series by attempting to run cvs without
> > arguments, which succeeds if installed, and skipping the test if the
> > command fails.
> 
> Hrm. I don't have cvs installed, and those tests are properly skipped for me.
> That's because they include lib-cvs.sh, which has:
> 
>   if ! type cvs >/dev/null 2>&1
>   then
>           skip_all='skipping cvsimport tests, cvs not found'
>           test_done
>   fi
> 
> Why doesn't that work for you? Does the "type" check not work (e.g., you
> have something called "cvs" but it does not behave as we expect)? If so, then
> it sounds like we just need to harmonize that with the other checks.
> 
> It also sounds like the t9400 tests could be using lib-cvs to avoid duplicating
> logic, though it might need some refactoring (they don't need cvsps, for
> example).

The t9400 tests use the same technique as I used - and I mistakenly trusted it. The type check does not fail.

if ! type cvs >/dev/null 2>&1
then
	echo "oops"
fi

does not print "oops". type is reporting $?=0 and a legitimate file in /usr/local/bin/cvs. Confusingly, t9400 skips, but type reports a valid path. I think the test done in the t9400 series is not correct.

cvs >/dev/null 2>&1 on the platform causes $?=255, while a blah >/dev/null 2>&1 reports $?=127.

There is something else going on causing the cvs-related tests to fail that this patch might be hiding. We do have cvsps so I'm now much more confused by the whole thing.

Let's drop this patch for now. I was premature on this patch and need to dig deeper as to what is going on.

Randall