Eric Blake wrote:
> this particular use of system() is essential to the
> test, and unlike the mingw system("rm") case, this one should assert
> that the subprocess succeeded.OK, I've reverted your change and added an ASSERT: 2011-07-08 Bruno Haible <[email protected]> sigprocmask tests: A better way to avoid a compiler warning. * tests/test-sigprocmask.c: Don't include "ignore-value.h". (main): Complain if system() returns non-zero. * modules/sigprocmask-tests (Depends-on): Remove ignore-value. --- modules/sigprocmask-tests.orig Sat Jul 9 01:57:14 2011 +++ modules/sigprocmask-tests Sat Jul 9 01:56:06 2011 @@ -4,7 +4,6 @@ tests/macros.h Depends-on: -ignore-value sleep configure.ac: --- tests/test-sigprocmask.c.orig Sat Jul 9 01:57:14 2011 +++ tests/test-sigprocmask.c Sat Jul 9 01:56:29 2011 @@ -28,7 +28,6 @@ #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> -#include "ignore-value.h" #include "macros.h" #if !((defined _WIN32 || defined __WIN32__) && !defined __CYGWIN__) @@ -62,7 +61,7 @@ /* Request a SIGINT signal from outside. */ sprintf (command, "sh -c 'sleep 1; kill -%d %d' &", SIGINT, pid); - ignore_value (system (command)); + ASSERT (system (command) == 0); /* Wait. */ sleep (2); 2011-07-08 Bruno Haible <[email protected]> pthread_sigmask tests: Avoid a compiler warning. * tests/test-pthread_sigmask1.c (main): Complain if system() returns non-zero. --- tests/test-pthread_sigmask1.c.orig Sat Jul 9 01:57:14 2011 +++ tests/test-pthread_sigmask1.c Sat Jul 9 01:56:46 2011 @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ /* Request a SIGINT signal from outside. */ sprintf (command, "sh -c 'sleep 1; kill -%d %d' &", SIGINT, pid); - system (command); + ASSERT (system (command) == 0); /* Wait. */ sleep (2); -- In memoriam Jean Moulin <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Moulin>
