Re: Mauve test question

[Michael Koch]

Am Dienstag, 28. Dezember 2004 18:34 schrieb Jeroen Frijters:
> Archie Cobbs wrote:
> > The problem you describe with a blacklist goes away when there is
> > also an "xfails" file.
>
> I don't know. The risk is that we'll end up with a test blocked in
> everyone's xfails list, but since none of the VM implementers looks
> at all the other lists nobody realises that the problem is in fact
> in the test (or in Classpath).
>
> > I think the reason you want a whitelist is
> > because you use ./batch_run, which doesn't support "xfails". This
> > appears to me to be a deficiency of ./batch_run, not proof that a
> > whitelist is better.
>
> I don't use ./batch_run, I use a manually maintained list of
> reasonable tests. When I run the tests I simply run
> gnu.testlet.SimpleTestHarness and pipe in the list of tests, no
> scripts whatsoever (I hate scripts ;-)).

Mauve has too many ways to be used. ;-)

> BTW, since we don't seem to be making any progress convincing each
> other (and I'm not even sure the difference is all that
> significant), so I'm going to end this thread (from my part at
> least ;-)).

If someone improves the current situation and creates something better 
then ./batch_run I'm for it.


Michael
-- 
Homepage: http://www.worldforge.org/