Re: [PATCH 02/21] tests: Add bash lib

[Jonatan Schlag <jonatan.schlag@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1442 bytes --]


Hi,


Am Freitag, dem 31.05.2024 um 10:47 +0100 schrieb Michael Tremer:
> Hello,
> 
> > On 20 May 2024, at 10:05, Jonatan Schlag
> > <jonatan.schlag(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> > 
> > This allows use to write test with less effort as we can reuse
> > functions
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jonatan Schlag <jonatan.schlag(a)ipfire.org>
> > ---
> > tests/lib.sh | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 tests/lib.sh
> > 
> > diff --git a/tests/lib.sh b/tests/lib.sh
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000..7749d5158
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tests/lib.sh
> > @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
> > +#!/usr/bin/bash
> > +
> > +LIB_DIR="$(dirname "$(readlink -f "${BASH_SOURCE[0]}")")"
> 
> ???
> 
> I don’t think this is very intuitive.

Ok, what am I supposed to do about it? I need the path where this file
is located, and I cannot hard-code it. Should I add a comment?

Jonatan

> 
> > +. ${LIB_DIR}/lib_color.sh
> > +
> > +test_that() {
> > +
> > + if ! "$@" ; then
> > + echo -e "${CLR_RED_BG} Test failed: ${*} ${CLR_RESET}"
> > + return 1
> > + else
> > + echo -e "${CLR_GREEN_BG} Test succeded: ${*} ${CLR_RESET}"
> > + return 0
> > + fi
> > +}
> 
> We have had so many discussions about how to name functions. “That”
> is quite generic in my opinion.
> 
> Why not “test_command” or something like that?
> 
> > +
> > +var_has_value() {
> > + [[ "${!1}" == "${2}" ]]
> > +}
> > -- 
> > 2.39.2
> > 
>