3:12 a.m.
21.5
Mats provided some process tests for Linux, but I think these should
work on most any POSIX system. The attached patch messes with the
header comment a bit, and then changes the "when linux" condition to
"unless windows-nt".
Comments welcome, especially from Mats as to why he specified "Linux"
rather than "not Windows native".
Will wait a few days for comments, then apply, and deal with buildbot
and beta tester fallout as it arises. I hope that sounds like a plan,
if not, let me know!
Steve
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Patches mailing list
XEmacs-Patches(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-patches
8:29 a.m.
>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Comments welcome, especially from Mats as to why he specified
"Linux" rather than "not Windows native".
At the time I didn't want to make the tests active on any environment
I did not know for sure would have the tools available. If you think
it can be relaxed and used on more systems that is great.
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Patches mailing list
XEmacs-Patches(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-patches
10:01 a.m.
Mats Lidell writes:
>>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org>
writes:
> Comments welcome, especially from Mats as to why he specified
> "Linux" rather than "not Windows native".
At the time I didn't want to make the tests active on any environment
I did not know for sure would have the tools available. If you think
it can be relaxed and used on more systems that is great.
Well, I already know that all tests in that suite pass on Darwin (Mac
OS X 10.6.8). Yay! :-) So the underlying FreeBSD support is OK, too.
I wonder what happens on platforms where the default shell is csh,
though.
In general, if we think tests *might* pass, we probably want to enable
them. We *want* to hear any bad new early. If the results are
horrible, *then* disable them for a platform. If the results are
mediocre, consider fixing the platform support and/or the tests.
Of course, I think there's pretty good reason to suppose they won't
work on Windows NT (native) because it doesn't have anything close to
a POSIX shell available normally, and you use the shell a lot. But
Cygwin might work, since you'll probably have bash available. So I'm
only ruling out Windows NT (native) in my patch at present.
Regards,
Steve
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Patches mailing list
XEmacs-Patches(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-patches
11 a.m.
>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
So I'm only ruling out Windows NT (native) in my patch at
present.
Yes, good catch. Thanks for improving the tests!
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Patches mailing list
XEmacs-Patches(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-patches
3:57 p.m.
New subject: [AC21.5] Run process tests on POSIX systems
APPROVE COMMIT 21.5
I've pushed these. Thanks to Mats for comments.
I was going to leave the patch in the email for ease of reference, but
VM + message-mode doesn't work, and it's not that big a deal since you
can just hg pull and hg diff -c.
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
21.5
Mats provided some process tests for Linux, but I think these should
work on most any POSIX system. The attached patch messes with the
header comment a bit, and then changes the "when linux" condition to
"unless windows-nt".
Comments welcome, especially from Mats as to why he specified "Linux"
rather than "not Windows native".
Will wait a few days for comments, then apply, and deal with buildbot
and beta tester fallout as it arises. I hope that sounds like a plan,
if not, let me know!
Steve
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Patches mailing list
XEmacs-Patches(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-patches
4143
days inactive
4147
days old
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Stephen J. Turnbull -
The XEmacs Package Smoketest