[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: parallel testsuite execution

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: parallel testsuite execution
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:46:21 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

Hello Akim,

* Akim Demaille wrote on Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 05:14:39PM CEST:
> >>> "RW" == Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:
> Sorry for answering so late...

No problem.

> So I would like to be able to write something like
> TEST_SUITES = foo bar
> foo_TESTS = foo1.chk foo2.test foo3
> bar_TESTS = bar1.test bar3.c
> and be able to write on the side rules explaining how to .chk -> .log,
> .test -> .log etc.

Sounds useful.

> Maybe instead of _TESTS we could reuse _SOURCES?  That's not
> inconsistent: they are really sources which must be compiled into
> *.log files which are then linked together to produce foo.log and
> bar.log.

Hmm.  That would prevent us to name test suites after programs.
As I understand your proposal above, that would be intended though.

Dunno if that may be a bit difficult to understand.

>  > I guess as a first approximation it would be ok to do without.  The
>  > awk script may require a bit of work for Solaris; I'd just drop the
>  > colors;
> Nah, please, let's keep them, it's really very useful!

I don't remember whether you turned them off for non-terminal output,
but it should be configurable, and default to on only for terminal

>  > and also it would need adjustment for Sun make's gigantic VPATH
>  > rewriting feature; 'TEST_LOGS ?=' would need to be replaced by an
>  > override done at 'automake' time.  
> Sure, but who's going to spend some time on this?

Which of the two?  The Sun make adjustments are typically not hard.
The ?= is really GNU make specific.


reply via email to

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