[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Mauve test question

From: Michael Koch
Subject: Re: Mauve test question
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:43:59 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.6.2

Am Dienstag, 28. Dezember 2004 18:34 schrieb Jeroen Frijters:
> Archie Cobbs wrote:
> > The problem you describe with a blacklist goes away when there is
> > also an "xfails" file.
> I don't know. The risk is that we'll end up with a test blocked in
> everyone's xfails list, but since none of the VM implementers looks
> at all the other lists nobody realises that the problem is in fact
> in the test (or in Classpath).
> > I think the reason you want a whitelist is
> > because you use ./batch_run, which doesn't support "xfails". This
> > appears to me to be a deficiency of ./batch_run, not proof that a
> > whitelist is better.
> I don't use ./batch_run, I use a manually maintained list of
> reasonable tests. When I run the tests I simply run
> gnu.testlet.SimpleTestHarness and pipe in the list of tests, no
> scripts whatsoever (I hate scripts ;-)).

Mauve has too many ways to be used. ;-)

> BTW, since we don't seem to be making any progress convincing each
> other (and I'm not even sure the difference is all that
> significant), so I'm going to end this thread (from my part at
> least ;-)).

If someone improves the current situation and creates something better 
then ./batch_run I'm for it.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]