From: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Zander <zander@javalobby.org>
Cc: mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Some issues..
Date: Sun, 02 May 2004 12:27:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16532.59616.488848.916160@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200405011148.16628.zander@javalobby.org>
Thomas Zander writes:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thursday 29 April 2004 17:28, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > Thomas writes:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > On Thursday 29 April 2004 13:39, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > > > I don't see the problem, really. Â If it doesn't run on some system,
> > > > what is lost? Â All that happens is a few test failures.
> > >
> > > For most test environments I make the whole build fail as soon as a
> > > test fails; this is implemented in the ant-based mauve test as well.
> > > The reason for this is simple; if a test fails its a regression bug;
> > > you can't commit changes while you have a regression bug.
> >
> > Okay, but if you're going to insist on this you need a way to mark
> > known/expected failures: does any VM pass everything? So, why not
> > mark this whole thing as "known to fail" on Windows and move on?
>
> There are 3 approaches to this; I'd suggest the first for ease of use..
> 1) check in the test (or even in the test-framework) if a system setting is
> present.
> If(System.getProperty("os.name").equals("Windows")) return;
This sounds not entirely unreasonable, but there is one disadvantage:
if the Win system has a working shell, it seems a shame not to run
this test. But in this case it's probably not important one way or
the other: if the Runtime.exec() fails, you can just return. It's
really only gcj that needs these tests as far as I am aware.
Andrew.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-02 12:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-23 9:12 Jeroen Frijters
2004-04-25 11:10 ` Mark Wielaard
2004-04-29 11:41 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-29 13:16 ` Thomas
2004-04-29 15:29 ` Andrew Haley
2004-05-01 9:49 ` Thomas Zander
2004-05-02 12:27 ` Andrew Haley [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-04-03 13:05 Thomas Zander
2004-04-03 13:16 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-03 13:41 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-03 15:42 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-03 16:06 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-15 22:22 ` Mark Wielaard
2004-04-16 9:31 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-16 11:29 ` Mark Wielaard
2004-04-16 12:04 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-22 21:41 ` Mark Wielaard
2004-04-15 22:14 ` Mark Wielaard
2004-05-07 11:54 ` John Leuner
2004-05-07 13:25 ` Thomas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=16532.59616.488848.916160@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com \
--to=aph@redhat.com \
--cc=mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=zander@javalobby.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).