> -Original Message-
> From: Sam Spilsbury [mailto:smspil...@gmail.com]
>>
>>
>>
> Ah interesting. I guess the point of the tests is to verify the
> backends themselves as opposed to testing the core compositor (well,
> it tests that as an incident, but I guess its not the point?). Does it
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Eoff, Ullysses A
wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Sam Spilsbury [mailto:smspil...@gmail.com]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> Yes, it would be trivial to enable the input-based tests to run on the
> headless backend... however, it's unclear to me whether the headl
> So - shall I create and submit some patches to get the tests working
> on headless? I suppose this is a desirable thing right?
>
Ah, to clarify this point - I meant submitting patches which would
allow the headless backend to be used in testing, as opposed to just
x11 and drm.
> Best,
>
> Sam
>
f,
>> Ullysses A
>> Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:24 PM
>> To: Sam Spilsbury; wayland
>> Subject: RE: [RFC] [tests] Running the wayland tests against
>> compositor-headless
>>
>> Changing the tests to run headless is probably not necessary...
>>
>
>
am Spilsbury; wayland
> Subject: RE: [RFC] [tests] Running the wayland tests against
> compositor-headless
>
> Changing the tests to run headless is probably not necessary...
>
To clarify... I only meant this in the context of the weston-tests-env script ,
i.e.
it does not need to be
Changing the tests to run headless is probably not necessary...
You can create your own custom "check" script if weston-test-env
does not suite your needs. To use it with "make check", just set/export the
LOG_COMPILER environment variable to refer to that script before running
"make check". "mak
