On 01/04/2020 00:06, Chris Johns wrote:
On 2020-03-31 21:02, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 31/03/2020 11:56, Chris Johns wrote:
On 2020-03-31 19:57, Moyano, Gabriel wrote:
diff --git a/testsuite/arphole/test_main.c
b/testsuite/arphole/test_main.c
index 19d67b89..45a28cc0 100644
--- a/testsuite/arphole/test_main.c
+++ b/testsuite/arphole/test_main.c
@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@
#include <rtems/bsd/util.h>
#define TEST_NAME "LIBBSD ARP HOLE"
+#define TEST_STATE_USER_INPUT 1
In rtems.git these test states are defined on the compiler command
line. The user input state is OK to define in the code but it gets
more difficult with the others to manage them in the code and so I
am wondering how we manage the other states in libbsd? And if we
manage those in the build system then why manage this one?
Why should this define move to the build system of libbsd. It is a
property of the test if it is interactive or not.
I was only highlighting the inconsistencies and problems that result.
Placing the define in the source of a test was consider in rtems.git
however having all data related to controlling tests in a single place
was considered the better path. I asset this is still valid.
Yes, you are right, however, this patch is already an improvement which
is worth to commit. Making this even better is a different topic and a
secondary step from my point of view. Before the new build system for
RTEMS is not integrated I am not in favour of adding more complexity to
the libbsd build system.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
