On Oct 22, 2014, at 3:48 AM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <d...@des.no> wrote:
> Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> writes:
>> I’ll fix this. I think we need to have a MK_TESTS_SUPPORT that builds
>> the libatf stuff when yes, and omits it when no, since we don’t want
>> the tests building when we’re building the 4.3 stage.
>
> I agree, bundling everything under MK_TESTS does not make much sense.
> Automake has the same bug ("make check" will both build the tests and
> run them, and while you can rerun the tests without rebuilding them
> ("make recheck"), there is no way to build them without running them.
>
> I would prefer calling this MK_ATF than MK_TESTS_SUPPORT, though. The
> test framework is probably useful on its own.
That would be a nicer name, but then we’d lose the automatic setting when
MK_TESTS
is enabled (unless we add another special case, which is the opposite direction
that
I want to go in). How strongly do you feel that’s a better name?
Warner
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
