Hi Reuben,
On 5 Jul 2012, at 05:39, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> On 4 July 2012 23:35, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> tags 11863 + moreinfo
>> thanks
>>
>> On 07/04/2012 10:43 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>>> I have a library that I want to build just for tests. Hence, I add it
>>> to check_LTLIBRARIES. It's
On 4 July 2012 23:35, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> tags 11863 + moreinfo
> thanks
>
> On 07/04/2012 10:43 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>> I have a library that I want to build just for tests. Hence, I add it
>> to check_LTLIBRARIES. It's a plugin, so I want the .so (or .dll or
>> whatever) to be built,
tags 11863 + moreinfo
thanks
On 07/04/2012 10:43 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> I have a library that I want to build just for tests. Hence, I add it
> to check_LTLIBRARIES. It's a plugin, so I want the .so (or .dll or
> whatever) to be built, but it isn't!
>
It isn't built when you run "make check"?
I have a library that I want to build just for tests. Hence, I add it
to check_LTLIBRARIES. It's a plugin, so I want the .so (or .dll or
whatever) to be built, but it isn't!
If I instead add the library to pkglib_LTLIBRARIES, then the shared
object is built, but the test library is installed, whic
Severity: wishlist
Hello automakers.
Anyone has an idea about why the 'color-tests' option should be not
enabled by default (apart from the obvious historical reasons, that
is)?
Even when this option is on, the developer is free to disable testsuite
coloring on a per-makefile basis (by adding "A
