Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MUONTPAR: fix test failures with static build and tidy up code #8573

Open
FreddieAkeroyd opened this issue Nov 17, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

MUONTPAR: fix test failures with static build and tidy up code #8573

FreddieAkeroyd opened this issue Nov 17, 2024 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@FreddieAkeroyd
Copy link
Member

The muontpar system tests fail with the static EPICS build, error is Write access denied for PV TE:SPARE53:MUONTPAR_01:SAVE_FILE but this is likely due to an earlier fault.

@FreddieAkeroyd
Copy link
Member Author

Couple of questions:

  • newFileWarning is only set on file not found and not other file errors, is that correct?
  • getline is used to read lines in a file, then all lines are concatenated together to store in single char array - could the file just be directly read into the char array?

@rerpha
Copy link
Contributor

rerpha commented Nov 27, 2024

@FreddieAkeroyd am i OK to review this?

@FreddieAkeroyd FreddieAkeroyd moved this to Review in PI_2024_08 Nov 27, 2024
@FreddieAkeroyd
Copy link
Member Author

@rerpha yes - and please comment on questions above too

@rerpha
Copy link
Contributor

rerpha commented Nov 28, 2024

newFileWarning is only set on file not found and not other file errors, is that correct?

Just trying to think which other errors should indicate that the writer is going to make a new file. if it can't load a file it shouldn't overwrite it I don't think?

getline is used to read lines in a file, then all lines are concatenated together to store in single char array - could the file just be directly read into the char array?

possibly - I think Isaac may have done this for the CSS to show newlines but i'm not certain - if it works OK reading directly in we could do that instead and I think that simplifies the logic a fair bit?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Review
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants