[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Yet Another test option
From: |
Bob Proulx |
Subject: |
Re: Yet Another test option |
Date: |
Sun, 3 Jul 2011 14:41:49 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
Bruce Korb wrote:
> I wouldn't know. I use it myself a bit and I am now playing with
> Lustre fs code where they get it wrong because it is inconvenient to
> get it right. After seeing that, I thought I'd suggest it.
> ...
> P.S. this check is really for any version below 2.6.27:
>
> - case $LINUXRELEASE in
> - # ext4 was in 2.6.22-2.6.26 but not stable enough to use
> - 2.6.2[0-9]*) enable_ext4='no' ;;
> - *) ..... ;;
>
> and might have been done correctly with a version compare operator.
Note that on Debian systems and derivatives you can use dpkg with the
--compare-versions option to perform this test.
$ set -x
$ dpkg --compare-versions 2.6.27 le $(uname -r) ; echo $?
++ uname -r
+ dpkg --compare-versions 2.6.27 le 2.6.39-2-amd64
+ echo 0
0
dpkg --compare-versions 2.6.27 le $(uname -r) || enable_ext4='no'
I seem to recall a similar command on Red Hat based systems but off
the top of my head the details escape me.
Bob
- Yet Another test option, Bruce Korb, 2011/07/02
- Re: Yet Another test option, Chet Ramey, 2011/07/03
- Re: Yet Another test option, Bruce Korb, 2011/07/03
- Re: Yet Another test option,
Bob Proulx <=
- Re: Yet Another test option, Greg Wooledge, 2011/07/05
- Re: Yet Another test option, Bruce Korb, 2011/07/05
- Re: Yet Another test option, Chet Ramey, 2011/07/06
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Yet Another test option, Eric Blake, 2011/07/06
- Re: Yet Another test option, Bruce Korb, 2011/07/06
- Re: Yet Another test option, Chet Ramey, 2011/07/06