On 05/04/2018 15:25, Sebastian Huber wrote: > The patch looks good. Thanks, and it works with 1.16.1 as well as the automake version we are using.
> I just have some general questions. > > On 05/04/18 05:20, Chris Johns wrote: >> This change is part of refactoring the testsuite's build system to >> remove nested make builds for every test. >> >> Update #3382 >> [...] >> diff --git a/c/src/make/leaf.cfg b/c/src/make/leaf.cfg >> index 8d3f52ecde..045ee1ab0e 100644 >> --- a/c/src/make/leaf.cfg >> +++ b/c/src/make/leaf.cfg > > Why do we need this leaf.cfg at all for the internal build system? Can't we > use > the default Automake link rules if we are satisfied with an ELF file? > Because it was there? I have not chased down these areas. Small steps and then removal etc. > [...] >> +if TEST_fsdosfsname02 >> +fs_tests += fsdosfsname02 >> +fs_screens += fsdosfsname02/fsdosfsname02.scn >> +fs_docs += fsdosfsname02/fsdosfsname02.doc >> +fsdosfsname02_SOURCES = fsdosfsname02/init.c >> +fsdosfsname02_CPPFLAGS = $(AM_CPPFLAGS) $(TEST_FLAGS_fsdosfsname02) >> $(fs_support_includes) >> +endif > [...] > > Do we really have install all the *.doc and *.scn files? Do we have to install > the test programs? Just providing what was there. If the consensus is not installing these files the support can be removed, it is not hard to update. > I usually build a BSP with tests and run them. Afterwards I build the BSP > again > without tests and install it. I can see a possible work flow for configuration management of a BSP having tests installed for a "golden" RTEMS. A hardware revision could run those tests and the results checked against our published and expected results. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
