From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kenichi Handa Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: running each test file independently in test/automated Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 22:00:44 +0900 Message-ID: <87zjrb7gcj.fsf@gnu.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1379422870 10809 80.91.229.3 (17 Sep 2013 13:01:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:01:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Barry OReilly Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 17 15:01:13 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VLuu0-0005K1-Ed for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:01:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40998 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLuu0-0004ML-3O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:01:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36535) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLuts-0004M6-1J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:01:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLutl-0001Lb-Hy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:01:03 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42741) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLutl-0001LW-Es for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:00:57 -0400 Original-Received: from fl1-119-240-85-246.iba.mesh.ad.jp ([119.240.85.246]:50828 helo=shatin) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLutk-00029P-6Q; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:00:56 -0400 Original-Received: from handa by shatin with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VLutY-0001Vs-Ko; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 22:00:44 +0900 In-Reply-To: (message from Barry OReilly on Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:54:22 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:163385 Archived-At: In article , Barry OReilly 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