On 02/13/2012 11:00 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 02/13/2012 07:50 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote: >> On 02/10/2012 05:21 PM, Jérémy Compostella wrote: >> >> Sorry, this is a bit late, but I have 2 notes about the >> new dd/bytes test: >> >>> diff --git a/tests/dd/bytes b/tests/dd/bytes >>> new file mode 100755 >>> index 0000000..6038742 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/tests/dd/bytes >>> @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ >> >>> +# seek bytes >>> +echo abcdefghijklm | >>> + dd bs=5 seek=8 oflag=seek_bytes > out 2> /dev/null || fail=1 >>> +echo abcdefghijklm | >>> + dd bs=4 seek=2 > expected 2> /dev/null || fail=1 >>> +compare expected out || fail=1 >> >> I don't know why, but I somehow do not have a good feeling >> about a test comparing the result of the program to be tested >> with another run. If something cowardly fails, then this test >> would succeed. > > Fair point.
Thanks for the patch. >>> +# seek bytes on empty file >>> +echo abcdefghijklm | >>> + dd bs=5 seek=8 oflag=seek_bytes > out2 2> /dev/null || fail=1 >>> +compare expected out2 || fail=1 >> >> The comment is wrong here, isn't it? > > Well out2 will be a new empty file. > Though the case is no different to the previous > (since conv=notrunc was not specified). > So I'll just remove it. Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification. BTW: shouldn't echo abcdefghijklm | src/dd bs=5 seek=8 oflag=seek_bytes receive EPIPE? When run on a terminal, dd waits in read() forever. Have a nice day, Berny
