Re: [lmi] Manual test of automated GUI test

[Greg Chicares]

On 2014-10-18 23:15Z, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 22:44:58 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> GC> I've built lmi with all the latest GUI-testing patches, using a
> GC> wx snapshot as of 2014-10-18T16:40Z. It seemed like a good idea
> GC> to start with deliberate mischief, so I did this:
> GC>   ./wx_test.exe --data_path=/opt/lmi/data
> GC> without a command-line argument to suppress the automatic
> GC> "Help | About" dialog--remembering that running the last version
> GC> this way caused an unanticipated problem.
> 
>  Sorry, I've only tested with this special command line argument so far, I
> thought I had mentioned this

Of course you mentioned it, but I mischievously disregarded that...

> GC> [Others could easily do this by accident, so would it make sense
> GC> to forestall it...e.g., by issuing an 'Esc' keypress before doing
> GC> anything else in the GUI test, if that's possible?]
> 
>  OK, I'll look into doing this.

...largely for this reason.

> GC> 22:37:39: Error: can't open file 'wx_test.conf' (error 2: the system 
> cannot find the file specified.)
> 
>  This is expected, this file needs to be created manually using the example
> from my 2014-09-08T11:07:20Z email as the model.

Oh. I forgot.

> GC> When I clicked "OK", it crashed;
> 
>  I hadn't seen this yet. I'll try to debug it

I suspect that wrapping what main() does in the same kind of
try-catch(...) clauses used in 'main_wx.cpp' might work--and if it's
that cheap to make it bulletproof, then I guess we should do so.

Still, the segfault was at 0x0FFFFFFFF IIRC, and the first idea
that came to mind was that that address could indicate some exotic
problem that might be worth mentioning.