BIND 10 #1960: perfdhcp integration

[BIND 10 Development]

#1960: perfdhcp integration
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:         |                 Owner:  marcin
  stephen                            |                Status:  reviewing
                       Type:         |             Milestone:  Sprint-
  enhancement                        |  DHCP-20121004
                   Priority:         |            Resolution:
  medium                             |             Sensitive:  0
                  Component:         |           Sub-Project:  DHCP
  perfdhcp                           |  Estimated Difficulty:  0
                   Keywords:         |           Total Hours:  0
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |
Feature Depending on Ticket:         |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by stephen):

 * owner:  stephen => marcin


Comment:

 Reviewed commit 2538cdc2251cc27c38193680af90f2e7e94ffb57


 '''tests/tools/perfdhcp/test_control.h'''[[BR]]
 I've corrected some typos etc. in comments and pushed the modified file.

 '''tests/tools/perfdhcp/command_options.cc'''[[BR]]
 Do not appear to have sorted the list of switches in the getopt() call in
 alphabetical order.  However, don't bother to change it now - it works, I
 just thought that the switches looked more logical when arranged
 alphabetically.

 '''tests/tools/perfdhcp/tests/command_options_unittest.cc'''[[BR]]
 Could encapsulate calls to process()

 > It can be even more colons. I extended error message to point out that
 single colon is fine too.
 OK - I just thought it was usual to separate the numbers in the MAC
 address with single colons, which was why I asked the question.


 The unit tests failed:
 {{{
 command_options_unittest.cc:151: Failure
 Value of: process("perfdhcp -6 -l ethx -h all")
   Actual: false
 Expected: true
 VERSION: 20120817
 command_options_unittest.cc:152: Failure
 Value of: process("perfdhcp -l ethx -v all")
   Actual: false
 Expected: true
 Running: perfdhcp -l ethx
 [  FAILED  ] CommandOptionsTest.HelpVersion (13 ms)
 }}}
 This was due to a problem in the wrapper function
 CommandOptionsTest::process() is declared bool but did not contain a
 "return" statement. Surprisingly, it compiled without complaint on my
 Linux system.  I've fixed the test (returned the status from
 CommandOptionsHelper::process()) and it now passes.  The updated has been
 pushed.
 ----
 If you're happy with the changes I've made, you can merge.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/1960#comment:9>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development