Re: [PATCH] Re: running each test file independently in test/automated

[Kenichi Handa <handa@gnu.org>]

In article <CAFM41H3JOzvyOUf_eRYj+MmD3X4f6n8-qohGpzyZRwm-FacHgw@mail.gmail.com>, Barry OReilly <gundaetiapo@gmail.com> writes:

> > We have to catch an error of byte-compilation,

> To what end? The individual can see build errors and I presume Hydra
> reports build failures originating in the Makefile.

Ah, "have to" was too strong, but it is more convenient that
the whole testing doesn't stop by an error of a single test
file.

> > but there already exists this target and rule, and I'd like not to
> > change the original behavior.

> Doing in ert.el what the Makefile is responsible for seems off to me.

I agree with that.  If we don't have to keep the original
behavior of "make check", let's modify the rule of
".el.elc:".

> If test code build errors are to go in the summary, why shouldn't
> build errors of the code under test? If incorporating build failures
> into a summary report is good enough to do, why isn't it good enough
> for 'make check'?

Sorry but I don't understand what you want to say.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@gnu.org