Re: [Xen-cim] Test suite

[Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Gareth S Bestor wrote:
>
> Sorry for the delay in responding (another 2 week business trip... sigh)
>
> I agree. Seems like sblim-testsuite has some basic advantages, even in
> its current limited form.
> And whatever dependence it has on a cli helper, ie wbemcli, should be
> minimally invasive and not
> too bad to remove/replace with say a python/curl equivalent.
>

FYI, I committed Luke's patch today.

Luke - you correctly mentioned on today's call that 'interface tests' on
association providers should be next.  A patch for that would be nice
:-).  We'll then move on to the 'consistence tests'.

BTW, we might want to just include the input files in project instead of
generating.  I can see them diverging over time.  What do you think?

> The nice thing about having a lower-level CIM client, at least right
> now, is that it'll allow us to
> actually DO DefineVS(), since non of the existing tools support
> embedded instances (or even
> references as arguments it seems....)
>

pywbem supports embedded instances.  E.g.

mem_rasd = pywbem.CIMInstance('Xen_MemorySettingData',
                                             
{'ResourceType':pywbem.Uint16(4),
                                             
'VirtualQuantity':pywbem.Uint64(256),
                                             
'AllocationUnits':'MegaBytes'})


I regularly use test scripts that do DefineSystem(), AddResource(), etc.
with such embedded instances :-).

Jim


_______________________________________________
Xen-cim mailing list
Xen-cim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-cim