Thanks Stephan This is a big help. I'll revisit my patch with this new information and get some of the tests enabled so that I can see what happens. I'll repost my patch after doing that and making the changes you have suggested.
Cheers Justin Hi Justin, > > Thanks a lot for working on this. Unfortunately, you sent your patch > inline within your mail, which makes it hard to extract it (line breaks > added by mail software, etc.)---could you please re-send it as an > attachment? > > A few notes: > > - Each file that includes a cppunit header needs to include > sal/precppunit.hxx first, see <http://wiki.**documentfoundation.org/** > Development/Unit_Tests<http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Unit_Tests>> > and <http://lists.freedesktop.org/**archives/libreoffice/2011-** > September/018152.html<http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-September/018152.html>>. > It would be great if you could modify your patch accordingly. (I also > note that sal/qa/rtl/bootstrap/rtl_**Bootstrap.cxx includes the cppunit > headers twice in a row.) > > - These unit tests are currently not run. How to enable them depends on > whether the respective module has already been changed to gbuild or still > uses dmake. For sal, for example, (which still uses dmake), each test's > directory would need to be added to sal/prj/build.lst. The necessary lines > can be modelled after the lines for already enabled tests, > > sa sal\qa\... nmake - all sa_qa_... sa_cppunittester sa_util_saltextenc > NULL > > Then, executing "build" in sal should include those tests. > > - For many of those tests, it is unclear whether they build at all, and, > if they do build, whether they work reliably (i.e., succeed each time they > are run; work not only on one platform). Especially for the ones in sal, I > assume some are rather rotten (won't even compile) and/or do not reliably > work on all platforms. If you like, it would be great if you could try to > enable some of the sal tests and see if they compile at all. If they fail > badly, its probably better to ditch them than to invest too much time > trying to get them working. Then, if there is a bunch of working ones > left, we can commit them and see if the various tinderboxes like them, too > (i.e., if they work reliably cross-platform). > > Let me know if that sounds like a plan to you. > > Stephan >
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice