Re: [pdf-devel] "Hello" and questions

[jemarch]

   >> I think that at this point it would be a good idea to check if the
   >> latest version of check.sf.net <http://check.sf.net> is supporting
   > mingw32 well enough to
   >> replace nocheck.  The alternative would be to implement the fixture
   >> capabilities in nocheck, but we don't want to write a full replacement
   >> of check :)
   > 
   > 
   > Could you be more accurate about that?
   > I mean, what did you mean with "supporting mingw32"?

   He means supporting Windows compilation, either with mingw32, cygwin or
   directly compiled in Windows.

Yep.

   > 
   > For example, I've got the latest svn version of libcheck and it compiled
   > with mingw32 cleanly. libgnupdf also compiled cleanly with this version
   > of libcheck with mingw32, but trying to run runtests.exe through wine
   > got me some complaint from check:
   > 
   > fixme:msvcrt:MSVCRT__sopen : pmode 0x6efe28 ignored
   > Running suite(s): alloc
   > check_run.c:168: This version does not support fork

   Yes, current check compiles in w32, but still lacks of forking support.

   > 
   > Adding
   > 
   > srunner_set_fork_status(sr, CK_NOFORK);

   Better to put the envvar CK_FORK=no instead of modifying runtests.c to
   always run in no-forked mode.

   So maybe Jose is right and we should skip using no-check from now
   on?

I will take a look to the development branch of check and try to use
it to run our tests under wine.  If it reasonably works we would stop
using nocheck.

-- 
Jose E. Marchesi
address@hidden

GNU Project
http://www.gnu.org