[Libvirt-cim] [PATCH] [TEST] Fix SettingsDefineCapabilities/03_forward_errs.py

[Kaitlin Rupert]

>  > >> > >   It fails because of different error code and desc for F9 rpm
>  > >> and F10.
>  > >> > >   With invalid_instid_keyvalue, it expected to return {'rc' :
>  > >> > > pywbem.CIM_ERR_FAILED, 'desc' : 'Unable to determine resource 
> type'}
>  > >> > > for F9,
>  > >> > >   but we expected to return {'rc' : pywbem.CIM_ERR_NOT_FOUND,
>  > >> 'desc' :
>  > >> > > 'No such instance'} for F10.
>  > >> > >
>  > >> > >   I have to add a revision branch here. Would you tell me how 
> to get
>  > >> > > the revision number?
>  > >> > Yes this test need to be branched.
>  > >> > You can use get_provider_version() to get he revision number.
>  > >> > You can refer to 15_mod_system_settings.py tc for reference.
>  > >>
>  > >>   Deepti - Thanks for your relpy.
>  > >>   When I try to get the changeset number for this patch, It seems
>  > >> that the expect
>  > >>   error code number and desc are not changed yet, below is the part
>  > >> code for
>  > >>   this case in Virt_SettingsDefineCapabilities.c with current src:
>  > >>
>  > >>   ...
>  > >>         if (type == CIM_RES_TYPE_UNKNOWN) {
>  > >>                 cu_statusf(_BROKER, &s,
>  > >>                            CMPI_RC_ERR_FAILED,
>  > >>                            "Unable to determine resource type");
>  > >>                 goto out;
>  > >>         }
>  > >>   ...
>  > > Sorry I did not ask initially itself.
>  > > Which CIMOM did use when comparing the return values.
>  > > Do you use the same CIMOM on both F9 and F10 ?
>  > If the problem is with different CIMOM's returning different error
>  > information then we dont need to use get_provider_version().
>  > It would be good idea to verify what CIMOM is there on the machine and
>  > check the error information accordingly instead of modifying and
>  > verifying the common information in the error description for pegasus
>  > and sfcb.This will be good in case where two error messages occurring
>  > because of different reasons are partly same, and hence avoid false
>  > positives.
> 
>   This tc return both different error code and descriptions for sfcb and 
> pegasus.
>   It seems that somebody says it isn't a good idea to check the cimom 
> type in tc.
>   I'm not sure if we can deal with this by other ways.
>   Thanks!

Daisy - did you resolve your problem?  I tested with an F9 rpm using 
Pegasus, and this test passed for me.


-- 
Kaitlin Rupert
IBM Linux Technology Center
kaitlin at linux.vnet.ibm.com