On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 12:34:19PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 7/7/20 9:53 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > > Since 2011 Ubuntu has intentionally broken support for guestmount[1] by > > default and requires sysadmin intervention to re-enable support. This > > in turn exposed that in our tests if guestmount is available but fails > > we do not fall back to trying to use sudo. Restructure our code to try > > sudo if guestmount fails rather than only when it is not in our path. > > Further, only note that we are using fuse on success of the call. > > > > [1]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/759725 > > That is ... an interesting bug! > > This change looks conceptually fine. > > > diff --git a/test/py/tests/test_fs/conftest.py > > b/test/py/tests/test_fs/conftest.py > ... > > @@ -206,10 +206,11 @@ def mount_fs(fs_type, device, mount_point): > ...> + try: > > mount_opt = 'loop,rw' > > if re.match('fat', fs_type): > > mount_opt += ',umask=0000' > ... > > > > # may not be effective for some file systems > > check_call('sudo chmod a+rw %s' % mount_point, shell=True) > > + except CalledProcessError: > > + raise > > That last/inner try...except/raise clause doesn't seem useful. Perhaps > just remote try...except and keep the body?
I don't quite follow, sorry. What we have today is if/else on guestmount, but since check_call() throws CalledProcessError when it fails to run we never try sudo'ing. That's why I put the inner try/except/raise in. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
