This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] extras: New test/build infrastructure

On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Florian Weimer wrote:

> > I think there would be clear advantages to setting things up so that all
> > existing tests can use the new code with no changes at all.  That is, make
> > test-skeleton.c look more or less like your extras/test-skeleton.c, with
> > additional code to handle any missing pieces (e.g.
> Can you clarify what the goal is?  If the
> #include "../test-skeleton.c"
> is at the end, it shall be possible to replace it with
> #include <extras/test-skeleton.c>
> ?  Or do you want me to replace test-skeleton.c with a version which already
> includes <extras/test-skeleton.c>?  (All names subject to revision.)

I would like test-skeleton.c to either include extras/test-skeleton.c, or 
have essentially its contents in your patch, so that existing tests don't 
need changing at all to use the new facilities.  (This implies making your 
intrastructure support all the facilities test-skeleton.c does.)  This 
should work regardless of where in the test sources test-skeleton.c is 

(If there are a few tests for which full compatibility is hard, the patch 
might fix those at the same time as making the changes to test-skeleton.c.  
But unchanged tests should use the new facilities and the number of tests 
that need changing to make that so should be as few as possible.)

(Changing all tests later to use a different name from 
"../test-skeleton.c" is fine, but I think such a global change to all 
tests' sources is best kept out of the initial patch.)

Joseph S. Myers

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]