Running tests

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

From at least my point of view, there has not really been time to think about this, since we are so busy with just getting build-infra to replace the old build. I think there is a lot of good potential here, but I'm not sure what. In any case, I think that discussion needs to wait until build-infra has gotten further along.

The "make test TEST=..." was a first attempt. As you maybe have seen, I just published a WebRev needed to get that to work. (It actually broke in the build-infra forest as well, without anyone noticing...)

I think it could be reasonable to add test dependencies such as jtreg to configure. The only hard thing is how to act when non-essential (non-build) dependencies are missing. Should we abort configure? That would force everyone to have all non-essential tools. Should we ignore it and generate an incomplete configuration? That would make us fail at make time instead, violating the configure principle that a finished configure call should guarantee no missing build dependencies. This question recently crept up with some specific additional closed-source build tools, but it is relevant to test tools just as well. 

/Magnus

7 okt 2012 kl. 21:58 skrev Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>:

> 
> I'm wondering what the latest thinking is on running tests? Back in May I remember that Magnus added a test target with a TEST variable that would pass test targets through the existing/old Makefile. I'm just wondering if that will change or where this might go. I could imagine configure being run with the location of jtreg for example. I could imagine test targets having a dependency on an up to date build. At the same time I could imagine wanting to run tests and specify a different JDK to run the tests on (someone might want to run tests with the newly built JDK and some other JDK so that they can compare results for example).
> 
> -Alan