DejaGnu test directory layout

2008-08-19 Thread Reuben Thomas
From the DejaGnu manual: "DejaGnu require the directory be named `testsuite'." Automake by default makes dejagnu look for the config and ${TOOL}.test directories in the current subdirectory, which implies that automake expects to use dejagnu via "SUBDIRS = testsuite" with "AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS =

Re: DejaGnu test directory layout

2008-08-19 Thread Reuben Thomas
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Reuben Thomas wrote: From the DejaGnu manual: "DejaGnu require the directory be named `testsuite'." Automake by default makes dejagnu look for the config and ${TOOL}.test directories in the current subdirectory, which implies that automake expects to use dejagnu via "SUB

Re: DejaGnu test directory layout

2008-08-20 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello Reuben, * Reuben Thomas wrote on Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 06:44:31PM CEST: > On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Reuben Thomas wrote: > >> From the DejaGnu manual: >> >> "DejaGnu require the directory be named `testsuite'." >> >> Automake by default makes dejagnu look for the config and ${TOOL}.test >> direc

Re: DejaGnu test directory layout

2008-08-21 Thread Reuben Thomas
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hello Reuben, * Reuben Thomas wrote on Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 06:44:31PM CEST: On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Reuben Thomas wrote: From the DejaGnu manual: "DejaGnu require the directory be named `testsuite'." Automake by default makes dejagnu look for the c

Re: DejaGnu test directory layout

2008-08-21 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Reuben Thomas wrote on Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:20:38AM CEST: > On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: >> >> Not sure what the result of both your messages combined is. Care to >> formulate it as a patch against the manual? > > I'm not proposing a fix, I'm asking what the correct situation s

Re: DejaGnu test directory layout

2008-08-21 Thread Reuben Thomas
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Reuben Thomas wrote on Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:20:38AM CEST: On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Not sure what the result of both your messages combined is. Care to formulate it as a patch against the manual? I'm not proposing a fix, I'