Thanks for your comments Anthony! On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 16:23, Anthony Green wrote: > On Sun, 2004-04-11 at 21:12, C. Brian Jones wrote: > > * Cannot be installed (packaged, used repeatedly for various cases from > > same install) > > I'm not sure why you would want to "install" mauve. I guess I'm too > used to how we use Mauve with libgcj. I want to be able to run it against gcj, gij, kissme, kaffe, sablevm, jamvm, jdk, etc. Not really all at once, just depending on what I'm using at the time. I don't think the clean, reconfigure, make dance is appropriate for this task. > > * No integrated pass/fail/expected/unexpected summary > > The Big Idea was that different projects would have different QA > infrastructure requirements, which would be satisfied by writing system > specific test harnesses. So, for instance, we have a dejagnu specific > test harness in the libgcj source tree. Nothing wrong with that, but it wouldn't hurt to provide something out of the box would it? > > * Repeated executions require knowing inner workings of > > various scripts > > Again, this may be a result of our assumption that the core Mauve > infrastructure would be augmented by project specific infrastructure. It's pretty nasty. I have a feeling it turns some people away when it isn't very clear how to set it up, run it, add or modify a test, and re-run it. > > * Integration of additional libraries difficult at best > > * Integration of VM specific tests also difficult > > > > Solutions > > > > * Change configure script to be installation oriented, similar for > > Makefile.am (started this already) > > * New script(s) for running mauve to compile, execute, report > > results (consider using dejagnu) > > * Specify java compiler at runtime > > * Specify vm at runtime > > * Specify temporary directory at runtime > > * Specify additional libraries/resources at runtime > > * Specify additional tests at runtime > > Are you doing this for a specific system, or for stand-alone Mauve > usage? The intention is for standalone use. Although one could probably keep the Makefile.am/configure as-is, it would clean things up considerably to move such their current functionality into a re-usable script. > > Basically all the cruft and gorp in configure.in, Makefile.am, choose, > > etc. gets done over. The TAGS system is broken, it doesn't allow one to > > specify that a particular test is only valid for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and not > > 1.4+, essential to handle deprecated methods that eventually get > > removed. I have no problem doing this work, my problem is all the > > people that depend on the current directory structure, build process, > > etc. that will scream if something is changed. Anyway I have started > > the work, when I have a patch I'll let the list review. Don't hold your > > breath, I'm slow sometimes. :) > > FWIW, I don't feel strongly about the stand-alone Mauve infrastructure > as long as the libgcj usage doesn't break (see > gcc/libjava/testsuite/libjava.mauve). Right, I have a feeling that to do what I want I'd have to modify some part of this though probably not a great deal as long as tests can still be executed without installing. Brian