On 12/08/2017 07:46 PM, John Snow wrote: > > > On 11/22/2017 09:08 PM, Max Reitz wrote: >> Tests 080, 130, 137, and 176 simply do not work with compat=0.10 for the >> reasons stated there. >> >> 177 is a bit more interesting: Originally, it was actually very much >> intended to work with compat=0.10 (it even had a special case for that). >> However, it now prints the test image's map twice, and short of just not >> doing that, there is no solution I can imagine that is both simple and >> would leave compat=0.10 support intact. >> > > So we lost that support in > f0a9c18f9e7 > and > 81c219ac6ce > > Eric, any input before we downscope your test?
Ouch, I broke my own test. Maybe the best thing would be to split 177 into two tests: the original test (as it was before f0a9c18) that works on both compats, and a new test that works on just compat=1.1 images for the things added in later commits. Since I'm the author for all commits (so far) to that file, I guess I can sign up for that work... -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
