Hi Stefan,
On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 00:12, Stefan Herbrechtsmeier
<stefan.herbrechtsmeier-...@weidmueller.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Quentin,
>
> Am 31.08.2022 um 19:44 schrieb Simon Glass:
> > On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 09:55, Quentin Schulz <foss+ub...@0leil.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Quentin Schulz <quentin.sch...@theobroma-systems.com>
> >>
> >> The binary is looked on the system by the suffix of the packer class.
> >> This means binman was looking for btool_gzip on the system and not gzip.
>
> Are you sure? I test it and the name is already gzip because the bintool
> is requested as gzip. The find_bintool_class function only change the
> class name.
When I tested it, it was not picking up the correct version without this patch.
>
> >> Therefore, let's pass "gzip" as the name so that it can be found and
> >> used.
> >>
> >> Fixes: 0f369d79925a ("binman: Add gzip bintool")
> >> Signed-off-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.sch...@theobroma-systems.com>
> >> ---
> >> tools/binman/btool/btool_gzip.py | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> >
> > Oops! I wonder how we could test this? One way would be to require
> > those tools to be present and write a test that reads the version, I
> > suppose.
>
> We already have a test for the compressions:
> testCompUtilVersions
>
> Regards
> Stefan
Regards,
Simon
