Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:


Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Geir

I actually was serious. Probably you were confused, I didn't write "build test", I wrote "build smoke.test". The first one works ok, the second doesn't.

It happens because "test" (top-level test target) is handled in a different way from "smoke.test" (target just for smoke test category) target in build.xml. The "smoke.test" target just switches default processing target to "smoke.test" and runs "process_components" (which in its turn loops over all components). The "test" special handling of processing components escapes me, I don't quite understand how it works, but it seems to work correctly, without looping.

I've used them both, and targetted smoke for specific use cases (opt, etc)

Hmm you probably know more about VM build than I do since you've been modifying it for quite some time already. I've just started to look into the whole thing.


The question I was trying to solve was, how to correctly add jvmti.test target to the build.xml so that it would run only jvmti tests but not loop over components, but when "test" target it called, jvmti tests category would be executed along with all other categories.

Including "jvmti.test" target into build.xml in the same way as "smoke.test" doesn't make me happy.

Right - I thought you'd start a revolt and do it outside of the "loop over test types" system we have now.

Well I am not an ant guru, and the current build system definitely requires some time to understand. I've tried to copy most of the stuff from other test ant files to make my own. I think I'll file a JIRA before committing it to make it possible to discuss it.

In order to keep this simple, why not just have a separate test target for now

    $ sh build.sh test.jvmti

and we can stare at that together, and figure out how to integrate... simplest thing would be to rename the current "test" target to "test_loop" or something, and then

  <target name="test" depends="test_loop, test.jvmti" />

:)

Hmm good idea, why didn't I think of it myself?... :)

--
Gregory

Reply via email to