[RFC PATCH v1 16/21] test: hush: Fix variable expansion tests for hush 2021.

[Francis Laniel]

Hi.


(Sorry for the very late reply)

Le lundi 7 février 2022, 21:22:20 CET Simon Glass a écrit :
> Hi Francis,
> 
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 at 11:23, Francis Laniel
> 
> <francis.laniel at amarulasolutions.com> wrote:
> > Le mercredi 12 janvier 2022, 21:03:37 CET Simon Glass a écrit :
> > > Hi Francis,
> > > 
> > > On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 09:14, Francis Laniel
> > > 
> > > <francis.laniel at amarulasolutions.com> wrote:
> > > > This commit modifies the expected result for hush 2021.
> > > > Indeed, there were bugs in actual U-Boot hush which were fixed in
> > > > upstream
> > > > Busybox.
> > > > As hush 2021 is based on upstream Busybox, these bugs no longer exist.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Francis Laniel <francis.laniel at amarulasolutions.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > >  test/hush/dollar.c | 51
> > > >  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  1 file changed, 51 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > 
> > > Can you avoid the preprocessor macros?
> > > 
> > > Also, for testing we really want to be able to run both sets of tests
> > > in sandbox, so the parser needs to be run-time selectable.
> > 
> > To be sure, you would like to have a global variable named, for example,
> > parser which value could be:
> > * parser = "old", for old hush parser
> > * parser = "2021", for "new" hush parser
> > Is my understanding correct?
> 
> Yes although an int would be better than a string, perhaps controlled
> by a flag in global_data and a 'cli' subcommand to change  the
> setting.

If I understand correctly, that would mean to compile both the old and new 
parser?
Hence, I think I will need to rename some functions in the new parser to avoid 
problems at this level.

> Regards,
> Simon