Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

Stefano Lattarini wrote: ... >> I've seen a few projects that require their automake-managed tests >> be run sequentially. I suspect that some maintainers will not be eager >> to adapt their tests to run in parallel solely to accommodate a newer >> version of automake. If you have only a dozen or

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

On Monday 20 June 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > [SNIP] > > To quote from the added NEWS entry: > > - The parallel-tests driver is now implemented (partly at least) with > the help of automake-provided auxiliary scripts (e.g., `test-driver'), > instead of relying entirely on code in

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

On Tuesday 21 June 2011, Jim Meyering wrote: > Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > On Tuesday 21 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > >> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:12:23PM CEST: > >> > Maybe we should also say that using TESTS_ENVIRONMENT to define a custom > >> > test runner is n

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

On Tuesday 21 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:12:23PM CEST: > > Maybe we should also say that using TESTS_ENVIRONMENT to define a custom > > test runner is now not only strongly deprecated (as it already was I hope), > > No it wasn't. > D'oh

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On Tuesday 21 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: >> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:12:23PM CEST: >> > Maybe we should also say that using TESTS_ENVIRONMENT to define a custom >> > test runner is now not only strongly deprecated (as it already was I ho

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:12:23PM CEST: > Maybe we should also say that using TESTS_ENVIRONMENT to define a custom > test runner is now not only strongly deprecated (as it already was I hope), No it wasn't. "test runner" is not a term I would recognize, btw. > but also

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

On Monday 20 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Jim Meyering wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:29:50PM CEST: > > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > One thing I've regularly done with new code that is not 100% backward > > > compatible is have a new Automake option for them. That is exactly why > > > t

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

On Monday 20 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:22:28AM CEST: > > [Adding bug-grep, dropping bug-coreutils and automake-patches] > > re-adding the latter. > > > I've noticed that grep uses a definition of TESTS_ENVIRONMENT very similar > > to

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

* Jim Meyering wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:29:50PM CEST: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > One thing I've regularly done with new code that is not 100% backward > > compatible is have a new Automake option for them. That is exactly why > > there is a 'parallel-tests': it is not fully compatible wi

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:22:28AM CEST: >> [Adding bug-grep, dropping bug-coreutils and automake-patches] > > re-adding the latter. > >> I've noticed that grep uses a definition of TESTS_ENVIRONMENT very similar >> to that of coreutils (the one we

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:22:28AM CEST: > [Adding bug-grep, dropping bug-coreutils and automake-patches] re-adding the latter. > I've noticed that grep uses a definition of TESTS_ENVIRONMENT very similar > to that of coreutils (the one we've just fixed), so it will brea

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Subject: [PATCH 2/2] tests: avoid extra forks in the testsuite > > * tests/shell-or-perl: Prefer the `read' builtin over `grep' to > look at the shebang line of test scripts. Since `read' is a > special builtin, it might abort the whole program upon failures, > so add ex

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

Thank you! That patch looks fine modulo two typos. I'm folding in these corrections and have adjusted the grammar in the commit log (included below). diff --git a/tests/shell-or-perl b/tests/shell-or-perl index ff92009..08604eb 100644 --- a/tests/shell-or-perl +++ b/tests/shell-or-perl @@ -1,7 +1,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function (was: Automake patches for custom test drivers' support break coreutils testsuite)

On Saturday 18 June 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On Saturday 18 June 2011, Jim Meyering wrote: > > Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > >> ... > > >> > > > >> > In order to work with the upcoming new Automake testsuite harness, > > >> > coreutils > > >> > have two possibilities: > > >> > 1. move the

[PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function (was: Automake patches for custom test drivers' support break coreutils testsuite)

uot;') foo I should have tested better before reporting an imaginary problem. > > So I now think we should go with solution (2). > > Ok. > I've gone with the less invasive solution (1) instead. See the attached patch. I will soon post a follow up that tries to compe