To test: 1. Run prove xt/check_sysprefs.t 2. Note that the results warn you if any sysprefs are missing
Created attachment 10628 [details] [review] Bug 8353: Adds a test to check for missing sysprefs in the database Adds a non-test mode (--showsql option) that displays the missing sysprefs as sql inserts. Some sysprefs were missed from the syspref file due to extra spaces in the insert : fixed. The test now checks if there are at least as many sysprefs in the database as in the syspref file (instead of checking for the exact number) Signed-off-by: Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com> Cherrypicked from BibLibre master, rebased onto current master, and corrected typos, 2012-07-03
Created attachment 10748 [details] [review] Bug 8353 follow-up, perltidy It's a new script, perltidy-ing it before pushing
QA comment: new script, usefull for testing system preferences. well documented, properly written. I just submit a follow-up with the script perltidy-ed Chris = before pushing, could you confirm it should be in xt/ ? It's a db dependant test, that is useless to run on jenkins, because -unless there's something really weird- the table will always contain sysprefs.sql because it has been filed from there !
xt = release tests so yeah, this probably better in t/db_dependent
(In reply to comment #4) > xt = release tests > > so yeah, this probably better in t/db_dependent Thinking of it I think it's more a maintainance script, that should be in misc/maintenance than a test for jenkins: This is usefull for a production server, to check if something is missing in your systempreferences. Chris, do you agree ? If yes, i'll write a follow-up to move the script to misc/maintenance
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > xt = release tests > > > > so yeah, this probably better in t/db_dependent > > Thinking of it I think it's more a maintainance script, that should be in > misc/maintenance than a test for jenkins: This is usefull for a production > server, to check if something is missing in your systempreferences. > > Chris, do you agree ? If yes, i'll write a follow-up to move the script to > misc/maintenance I think maintenance would be fine, but it's Jared's patch i'll defer to him.
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Thinking of it I think it's more a maintainance script, that should be in > > misc/maintenance than a test for jenkins: This is usefull for a production > > server, to check if something is missing in your systempreferences. > > > > Chris, do you agree ? If yes, i'll write a follow-up to move the script to > > misc/maintenance > > I think maintenance would be fine, but it's Jared's patch i'll defer to him. I would greatly prefer it be in t/db_dependent. As of right now, we do practically nothing to test upgrades (in terms of automated testing, at least). Although the test would be essentially a no-op in a new installation, it would be very useful in testing an upgrade.
Created attachment 10813 [details] [review] Bug 8353 follow-up adding a tiny sh in misc/maintenance This script will help the sysadmin know there's a test he can use during maintenance
(In reply to comment #7) > > > Chris, do you agree ? If yes, i'll write a follow-up to move the script to > > > misc/maintenance > > > > I think maintenance would be fine, but it's Jared's patch i'll defer to him. > > I would greatly prefer it be in t/db_dependent. As of right now, we do > practically nothing to test upgrades (in terms of automated testing, at > least). Although the test would be essentially a no-op in a new > installation, it would be very useful in testing an upgrade. In french we say "cheese and desert". With the small 2nd follow-up, we add a tiny sh script that run the test. Sysadmin look in misc/maintenance, they won't necessarly know there's something usefull in xt/ for daily maintenance. With this 4 lines sh, they will. (I've added the --showsql option as a sysadmin want to know what to add) Please signoff & I'll push
Created attachment 10814 [details] [review] Bug 8353: Adds a test to check for missing sysprefs in the database Adds a non-test mode (--showsql option) that displays the missing sysprefs as sql inserts. Some sysprefs were missed from the syspref file due to extra spaces in the insert : fixed. The test now checks if there are at least as many sysprefs in the database as in the syspref file (instead of checking for the exact number) Signed-off-by: Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com> Cherrypicked from BibLibre master, rebased onto current master, and corrected typos, 2012-07-03 Signed-off-by: Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com>
Created attachment 10815 [details] [review] Bug 8353 follow-up: Perltidy new test Signed-off-by: Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com>
Created attachment 10816 [details] [review] Bug 8353 follow-up adding a tiny sh in misc/maintenance This script will help the sysadmin know there's a test he can use during maintenance Signed-off-by: Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com>
Patch pushed
This test exists on master.