Re: [Xen-devel] [OSSTEST PATCH 08/13] Reporting: Break out report_blessingscond

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 10:31 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [OSSTEST PATCH 08/13] Reporting: Break out 
> report_blessingscond"):
> > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > BTW, I noticed that your valid blessing regex here includes "-", which
> > is not allowed elsewhere, which breaks "./standalone make-flight -f
> > $branch $branch" for our common branch names meaning the flight name
> > needs some munging. A minor inconvenience, but if this check were moved
> > to a centralised helper it could be easily fixed...
> 
> I guess.  Do we have anywhere else that validates a blessing name ?
> This particular bit of code is just intended a safety catch to stop
> the SQL going wrong.
> 
> IMO `-' is valid in blessings.  Consider `commission-oseleta'.

I'm being very confused -- I was thinking of flight names, not blessing
names.

> > Or at least this was once the case, I can't see the problematic check
> > right now and haven't actually tried this for a while. Perhaps it got
> > fixed already and I didn't notice?
> 
> I'm not sure what check exactly you are referring to...

Neither was I right then (above and beyond s/blessing/flight/
confusion).

I've just done "./standalone -f xen-unstable xen-unstable" and it seems
to have worked but:

$ ./mg-show-flight-runvars xen-unstable
Died at ./mg-show-flight-runvars line 42.

Which is from:
        die unless @ARGV==1 && $ARGV[0] =~ m/^\w+$/;

I also notice that standalone-generate-flight-runvars is laundering out
the - too.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel