Re: [Gnash-commit] gnash ChangeLog doc/C/internals.xml

[strk]

On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 10:02:42PM +0100, ann wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, strk wrote:
> 
> >Oops, I'm afraid I'll need to review this.
> >Our "test output parser" doesn't parse 'PASS'/'FAIL' but
> >rather 'PASSED', 'FAILED'.
> >We're actually just "mimicing" Dejangu... Rob can you also
> >help some here ?
> 
> Not that I'm against you changing/rolling back my commit, but if
> you want to mimic Dejagnu, wouldn't it make more sense to use 'PASS'
> and 'FAIL'?  Or is there a compelling reason to differ from Dejagnu
> in this regard? (You can simply say 'yes', you don't need to explain
> why.)

IIRC Rob initially told me to use PASSED/FAILED as output.
I'm not a Dejagnu user, just started it's use with Gnash, so dunno
details.
What I can tell is that the script that parses PASSED/FAILED prints
PASS/FAIL back ... that's why I asked Rob for help :)

A possibility is that you used the wrong section of Dejagnu
manual, listing labels output from Dejagnu, rather then labels
expected by Dejagnu in input. But I don't really know what
I'm talking about.

What I'm sure about is that the "Test Runners" of gnash
will need to print (X)FAILED/(X)PASSED or our simple.exp
parser script will not understand.

You can also try verifying this by following the instructions
in the manual (you can use any programming language for
a test runner, just have it output some labels and modify
the Makefile.am so that it runs your testrunner).

--strk;