[OE-core] [PATCH] oeqa/runtime: Update test names with testopia tc numbers.

[Stefan Stanacar]

Hi Lucian,

I'm afraid that you added some lines in the smart.py module, that
shouldn't be there. Also a patch description would be nice, explaining
why this is needed.

On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Lucian Musat <georgex.l.musat at intel.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/smart.py b/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/smart.py
> index 195f117..735cbca 100644
> --- a/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/smart.py
> +++ b/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/smart.py
> @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ def setUpModule():
>
>  class SmartRepoTest(SmartTest):
> @@ -54,11 +54,13 @@ class SmartRepoTest(SmartTest):
>      @classmethod
>      def tearDownClass(self):
>          self.repo_server.stop()
> +       smartsRepo = SmartRepoTest
> +       smartsRepo.cleanup()
>

Those two lines shouldn't be here  and they don't seem to be correct anyway.

>
>  class SyslogTest(oeRuntimeTest):
>
> -    @skipUnlessPassed("test_ssh")
> -    def test_syslog_help(self):
> -        (status,output) = self.target.run('/sbin/syslogd --help')
> -        self.assertEqual(status, 0, msg="status and output: %s and %s" % (status,output))
> -
> -    @skipUnlessPassed("test_syslog_help")
> -    def test_syslog_running(self):
> +    @skipUnlessPassed("test_ssh_tc_224")
> +    def test_syslog_help_tc_202(self):
> +        (status,output) = self.target.run('ls -l /sbin/syslogd')
> +        if ('busybox' in output):
> +               pass
> +       else:
> +               (status,output) = self.target.run('/sbin/syslogd --help')
> +               self.assertEqual(status, 0, msg="status and output: %s and %s" % (status,output))
> +
> +    @skipUnlessPassed("test_syslog_help_tc_202")
> +    def test_syslog_running_tc_202(self):
>          (status,output) = self.target.run(oeRuntimeTest.pscmd + ' | grep -i [s]yslogd')
>          self.assertEqual(status, 0, msg="no syslogd process, ps output: %s" % self.target.run(oeRuntimeTest.pscmd)[1])

Again you are doing more changes that the summary of the patch
suggests, you are more than renaming methods here... And why is that
needed? Why did it worked until now and what triggered this change for
this test?


Cheers,
Stefan