[Fuego] Functional.LTP failed with "./ltp_target_run.sh not found"

[Bird, Timothy]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Sangorrin on Tuesday, October 10, 2017 10:51 PM
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bird, Timothy [mailto:Tim.Bird at sony.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 2:38 PM
> > To: Daniel Sangorrin; 'Liu, Wenlong'; fuego at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > Subject: RE: [Fuego] Functional.LTP failed with "./ltp_target_run.sh not
> found"
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Daniel Sangorrin on Tuesday, October 10, 2017 10:26 PM
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: fuego-bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org [mailto:fuego-
> > > bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Liu, Wenlong
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 2:10 PM
> > > > To: Bird, Timothy; fuego at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [Fuego] Functional.LTP failed with "./ltp_target_run.sh not
> > > found"
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tim,
> > > >
> > > > > Have you run Functional.LTP with the 'buildonly' spec yet?
> > > > > This should deploy the ltp_target_run.sh script to the target.
> > > > > Then you can execute other specs.
> > > > >
> > > > > We should probably put something in the test_pre_check for LTP,
> when
> > > > > "runonly" is true, to check that LTP has previously been deployed to
> the
> > > > > target.  Checking for ltp_target_run.sh might just do the trick.
> > > > I know what you mean, but the LTP is already installed on my target
> > > board(build and deploy are not necessary for me).
> > > > The LTP is already installed when the rootfs is made.
> > >
> > > This works as follows:
> > > - buildonly: produces a patched version of LTP, builds it and generates a
> > > tar.gz file that you have to install in your target rootfs.
> > > - runonly: skips build and deploy, and runs the LTP binaries that you
> installed
> > > on the target rootfs.
> > >
> > > Non-patched versions of LTP are not supported by the parser.
> >
> > That's good to know.  I'll check to see what the patches do, to see
> > if the parser could be run in a limited mode with unmodified LTP.
> > (Or we would push our patches upstream).
> >  -- Tim
> 
> My intention was to push them upstream, but I didn't have time to cleanup.
> The patch was to categorize the open posix test suite results. Actually
> the parser code for the open posix test suite is currently commented (see
> end of parser.py)

I saw this.  It was on my list of stuff to review before releasing 1.2.

...
 -- Tim