I see your point. As I told you we'll be open-sourcing a JAWT-specific
test under 7190587. This test already provides support for Linux,
Solaris, and Windows platforms, and even does a little more than just
loads the jawt library.
So it looks there's still some value in Kumar's test as well. Yes, it
will need to be rewritten should we replace the RPATH mechanism with
something else in the future. It's up to Kumar to decide whether he
wants such test to be present in the repo. Personally, I don't mind.
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 8/13/2012 7:04 PM, Omair Majid wrote:
On 08/13/2012 10:39 AM, Anthony Petrov wrote:
The test looks great, and I like that it doesn't depend on the JAWT
machinery, but tests the actual problematic RPATH entry only.
I generally go for tests that verify behaviour (that jawt-linked
programs are working) rather than implementation details (which changed,
for example, when we switched from LD_LIBRARY_PATH to RPATHS).
+1 from me.
Yes, good to have something that guards us from changing something
unintentionally. Looks fine to me too.
Cheers,
Omair
