[Fuego] [PATCH 29/30] tarball: simplify extraction

Tim.Bird at sony.com Tim.Bird at sony.com
Wed Jun 6 03:02:32 UTC 2018


OK I lied.  I'm still perusing the patches.

Below are some questions about this one.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fuego-bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org [mailto:fuego-
> bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Sangorrin
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 12:18 AM
> To: fuego at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: [Fuego] [PATCH 29/30] tarball: simplify extraction
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Sangorrin <daniel.sangorrin at toshiba.co.jp>
> ---
>  engine/scripts/functions.sh | 8 +-------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/engine/scripts/functions.sh b/engine/scripts/functions.sh
> index 68e31e7..ad34ff5 100755
> --- a/engine/scripts/functions.sh
> +++ b/engine/scripts/functions.sh
> @@ -87,13 +87,7 @@ function untar {
>      is_empty "$tarball"
> 
>      echo "Unpacking $tarball"
> -    case ${tarball/*./} in
> -        gz|tgz) key=z ;;
> -        bz2) key=j ;;
> -        tar) key= ;;
> -        *) echo "Unknown $tarball file format. Not unpacking."; return 1;;
> -    esac
> -    tar ${key}xf $TEST_HOME/$tarball --strip-components=1
> +    tar xvf $TEST_HOME/$tarball --strip-components=1

Are z and j not needed?  Does tar autodetect this now?

Separately - do we really want to make the extraction verbose (v option)?
It hasn't been before, and some of these tarballs are big, so the logs will
be a bit chatty.  Maybe the 'v' should be tied to a debug flag?

Just asking...

 -- Tim

>  }
> 
>  # Unpacks/clones the test source code into the current directory.
> --
> 2.7.4
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Fuego mailing list
> Fuego at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fuego


More information about the Fuego mailing list