From: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Makefile: new prove target for running the tests with TAP
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 11:21:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CB6CB97.7040009@drmicha.warpmail.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimuoanpbFbyv9C8qUbut22me1gMhH02eLqg0Nyd@mail.gmail.com>
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason venit, vidit, dixit 14.10.2010 11:05:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 08:53, Michael J Gruber
> <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
>> Introduce a new make target "prove" which runs the tests via "prove" (or
>> $(PROVE) if set) so that one does not have to cd around any more. One
>> can simply use "make prove" for "make test" or go wild as in:
>>
>> GIT_SKIP_TESTS='t[0-4]??? t91?? t9200.8' GIT_PROVE_OPTS="-j9 -v" GIT_TEST_OPTS="--verbose --debug" make prove
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
>> ---
>> RFC also because of lack of doc, and:
>>
>> Currently, one can do
>>
>> make -C t t6010-merge-base.sh
>>
>> or even
>>
>> make -C t t601*
>>
>> which is cool but undocumented. If we want this with prove it requires more
>> effort, or shoving prove into the $(T) target rule which is doable, of course.
>> I'm just wondering whether it's accepted to introduce a specific rule for prove
>> at all.
>
> I like the rationale behind this, but fwiw. I already had a patch that
> was ejected for this:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/146566
>
> Quoth Junio:
>
> "Besides, "make -j15 test" from the toplevel already runs the
> tests in parallel. I don't see much point in this change."
>
Sorry for the kind of dupe then. Though I can understand that the fixed
options back then didn't find Junio's approval. Maybe it's different
now, when it's completely interchangeable with make test?
> But I'd like to have it so that I could `make && make test_harness`
> and get readable test output.
>
> But we should probably be using t/harness to run them, not
> prove(1). Then we would make the test_harness target respect the
> HARNESS_OPTIONS variable, which I e.g. have set to HARNESS_OPTIONS=j9
> on my system.
Didn't know about that one either. What does t/harness
differently/better from/than prove? Does it take the same options? Is
t/harness respecting the SHELL_PATH for the tests? Running a test under
make test and make prove/harness needs to be completely equivalent.
Michael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-14 9:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-14 8:53 [RFC PATCH] Makefile: new prove target for running the tests with TAP Michael J Gruber
2010-10-14 9:05 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-14 9:21 ` Michael J Gruber [this message]
2010-10-14 9:33 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-14 16:27 ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-10-14 17:23 ` Jeff King
2010-10-27 0:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2010-10-27 4:57 ` Jeff King
2010-10-27 11:00 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2010-10-29 13:19 ` Michael J Gruber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4CB6CB97.7040009@drmicha.warpmail.net \
--to=git@drmicha.warpmail.net \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.