Re: Autotest test suite size
Derek Robert Price <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.sysutils.autoconf.bugs,gmane.comp.version-control.cvs.bugs |
|---|---|
| Organization | Ximbiot <http://ximbiot.com> |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Larry Jones wrote:
>Derek Robert Price writes:
>
>>One of the other CVS developers and I were discussing putting some of
>>the test setup we reuse with almost every test in shell functions, but I
>>know that the Autoconf manual is pretty adamant about not including
>>shell functions in portable shell. How many systems will we lose if we
>>start using shell functions?
>
>
>What's your definition of "lose"? The current sanity.sh already uses
>shell functions, and has for quite some time, so you wouldn't lose any
>system where it currently works.
I meant compared to the many systems the Autotest generated system
should run on.
The prototype Autotest suite loses the dependency on the oft broken expr
and sort that caused problems for sanity.sh on many platforms, as well
as shell functions.
The shell function issue could be viewed as a huge loss, but I wanted to
understand the options, see what help I might get from Autoconf and
elsewhere, and see how folks felt about a 20MB test suite before I made
any further decisions.
Regards,
Derek
- --
*8^)
Email: [email protected]
Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
- --
Tar is not a plaything.
Tar is not a plaything.
Tar is not a plaything...
- Bart Simpson on chalkboard, _The Simpsons_
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Netscape - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE/uQqQLD1OTBfyMaQRAv4jAKDms3XRSq6/E7bsp+orjSmFqIsUrgCeI/9T
BVa4JItX3DeJd8etuMgQgaU=
=wN7w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----