Actions
action #37949
closed[functional][u] Validate /var/log consistency
Status:
Rejected
Priority:
Low
Assignee:
Category:
New test
Target version:
Start date:
2018-06-27
Due date:
% Done:
0%
Estimated time:
Difficulty:
Updated by okurz over 6 years ago
I have seen chat about it today but maybe what we should check instead is log preservation over reboot and not where it's stored or where came your idea from?
Updated by riafarov over 6 years ago
@okurz, yes it's related to the discussion you've mentioned. I've just noted the idea briefly, I also believe we should expand this test to check more, e.g. that messages file is not there.
Updated by okurz about 6 years ago
- Subject changed from [functional] Validate /var/log consistency to [functional][u] Validate /var/log consistency
Updated by okurz almost 6 years ago
- Priority changed from Normal to Low
let's focus more on improving our current tests and workflows first. Putting to "holding tank" :)
Updated by szarate over 4 years ago
Let's clarify with rodion and see what's the meaning of this consistency :)
Updated by SLindoMansilla over 4 years ago
- Status changed from New to Rejected
- Assignee set to SLindoMansilla
As discussed with Rodion: "Ticket is too old for me to remember what was the motivation. I don't think that we will be able to find any strict requirements in those regards, so I would be fine if we just reject that item."
Actions