Re: [LTP] Where does the %!#? outout go?

[Howard B O. <ho...@ci...>]

That *almost* works. The -q option produces just the detail. But look at
this comparison from the quickhit set. First, without -q:

<<<test_end>>>
Testing for proper f00f instruction handling.
SIGILL received from f00f instruction.  Good.
<<<test_start>>>
tag=f00f stime=1092675330
cmdline="f00f"
contacts=""
analysis=exit
initiation_status="ok"
<<<test_output>>>
<<<execution_status>>>
duration=0 termination_type=exited termination_id=0 corefile=no
cutime=0 cstime=0
<<<test_end>>>

OK, that's displaced output. But look at the case with -q:

execvp01    1  PASS  :  execvp - properly exec's a simple program..
Testing for proper f00f instruction handling.
SIGILL received from f00f instruction.  Good.
fchmod01    1  PASS  :  fchmod(tfile_20547, 0700) returned 0

There's no PASS/FAIL line for f00f!

The verbose output may be harder to parse, but at least it has enough
information for me to reconstruct the results.

On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 09:09, Paul Larson wrote:
> You may also want to check out the -q option that just produces less
> spammy output to stdout.  So you still get details from each test.
> 
> Thanks,
> Paul Larson
> 
> On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 09:43, Howard B Owen wrote:
> > Yes, the "human readable" output format produces the summary I want to
> > present. However, I want the more detailed output to be available too,
> > particularly in the case where there is a failure of some sort. So I
> > extract the detailed output, and save it in a separate file, which I
> > then link to in my main output table.
-- 
Howard Owen    -  Linux Architect "Even if you are on the right
IBM Global Services - Cisco Linux  track, you'll get run over if you
ho...@ci...   +1-408-853-1381  just sit there." - Will Rogers