Why not use junit?
geir
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
On Wednesday 01 November 2006 19:48 Alexey Varlamov wrote:
Gregory,
I observed similar quirks with paths while intergrating kernel tests
into build. AFAIU the "Grand Design" is the following: there are
abstracted targets and isolated component descriptors; build system
iterates through all components and tries to apply given target to
each component. So there are various tricks to stop it running tests
multiple times a-la "recurring inclusion protection" in C headers.
I do not grok how it calculates dependencies though, but it is quite
easy to drive it mad and it starts doing wrong sequence of targets and
picks wrong components etc.
So I just snipped off that fanciful machinery and made simple subant
for "kernel.test" target - see its definition in build/make/build.xml,
and compare with nearby "smoke.test" one.
Ok I've made it though all of the interesting ant tricks and created my own
jvmti.test target. I noticed the difference of how kernel.test target is
included into build.xml as compared to smoke.test or unit.test.
AFAIU only "test" target does actually work to run only once and for the
required number of modes (jit, interpreter). This is done with a special
workaround for "test" target in build.xml, it has its own processing. But
inclusion of smoke.test and unit.test in build.xml right now makes it run in
a loop for all components for which tests don't have any relation to.
I am still experimenting with the build, it might be I'll find a solution for
individual test categories so it would be possible to run them separately
from the general "test" target.
