Re: QMTest where_is different than Environment.py Detect

Bill Deegan <bill-cJFiu+DHMVC5azolltMz9laTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.programming.tools.scons.devel
Message-ID <CAEyG4CH62m2efMc=_ME6_e1UYHpakLpoXpqw_qpa0zcEyzRadw@mail.gmail.com>
Depends how it is used.
If it's used in such a way that the results are then used in a generated
SConstruct to specify full path to the tools, then the logic makes sense.
If they are used to determine if the test should be run and they yield a
path which SCons wouldn't natively find, then yes that's not a good way to
determine if the test should pass.

Are you concerned about some tests in particular which are failing but
being run due to where_is's behavior?

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Daniel Moody <[email protected]> wrote:

> For some of the scons tool tests, the QMTest uses the test where_is method
> to find the existance of the binary to determine if the test should be run.
> Then when the test is actually being run, the environment uses it's Detect
> method to find the binary.
>
> The test where_is uses os.environ['PATH'] to search in, but the Detect
> method does not. This leads to cases where the os environment runtest.py
> was run under is different than the default environment path that gets set
> from scons.
>
> Should the test where_is work similar to the the environment detect for
> determining if the test should be run?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
>

_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.