Re: [Audit-test-developer] [PATCH 05/14] utils/envcheck: add rpm (suite) dependency check

[Stephan M. <ste...@at...>]

Am Mittwoch, 4. Dezember 2013, 15:28:44 schrieb Jiri Jaburek:

Hi Jiri,

>Signed-off-by: Jiri Jaburek <jja...@re...>
>---
> audit-test/utils/envcheck | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
>
>diff --git a/audit-test/utils/envcheck b/audit-test/utils/envcheck
>index 2e28754..d43958f 100755
>--- a/audit-test/utils/envcheck
>+++ b/audit-test/utils/envcheck
>@@ -143,6 +143,36 @@ check_variables() {
> }
>
>
>+### RPM DEPENDENCIES
>+check_rpm_deps() {
>+    local CHECK_FAILED
>+
>+    # requires for this check
>+    which rpm &>/dev/null || {
>+        echo "rpm binary not available, skipping rpm dependency
>checks" +        return 2
>+    }
>+
>+    # from README.run
>+    local rpms="audit-libs-devel expect libselinux-devel perl-devel \
>+                perl-Expect perl-IO-Tty"

Question: is it wise to hard code the RPM names? Note, other distros may 
use different names.

>+
>+    for rpm in $rpms; do
>+        check "rpm -q \"$rpm\"" 0 "rpm package $rpm is installed"
>+    done;
>+
>+    if [ "$CHECK_FAILED" ]; then
>+        echo
>+        echo "RPM dependency checking failed."
>+        echo "Please make sure you have installed all necessary suite"
>+        echo "requires / dependencies specified at the top of
>README.run." +        return 1
>+    else
>+        check_rpm_deps=1
>+    fi
>+}
>+
>+
> ### USER SESSION
> check_user_session() {
>     local CHECK_FAILED
>@@ -396,6 +426,7 @@ check_kvm() {
> # checks to be run, ordering is important
> CHECKS="
> check_variables
>+check_rpm_deps
> check_user_session
> check_suite
> check_networking_if


Ciao
Stephan