[rfc][icedtea-web] Add netx-dist-dist-tests-whitelist to .hgignore

[Jiri Vanek]

On 02/24/2015 03:18 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> ...snip...
>>>>>> You understand it right. The reason to keep the file was to make it simple. I'm
>>>>>> 50/50 to remove the file. Then, if file is not found, use default ".*". If its
>>>>>> found, then it is used (no metter what is it)
>>>>>
>>>>> Reads very reasonable to me and seems to be a far better approach than the
>>>>> current one.
>>>>
>>>> On second sight, yes. Me or Jie (Thoughts?)  will implement.
>>>
>>> At ached  patch seems to do the job. The real removal from the repo maybe more
>>> fun. Once this     is approve, I will proceed with removal and correct ignoring
>>> of our file.
>>>
>>> diff -r a1b50e850558 Makefile.am
>>> --- a/Makefile.am    Wed Feb 18 18:47:18 2015 +0100
>>> +++ b/Makefile.am    Fri Feb 20 15:34:07 2015 +0100
>>> @@ -193,12 +193,15 @@
>>>  endif
>>>  endif
>>>
>>> +# if you create netx-dist-tests-whitelist in top directory, and palce "expr match" regexes
>>> +# (separate by space) into it, you can control reproducers which compile or/xor run.
>>
>> Err no, please put this into the "Building" or "Testing" section of the README file. I do not think
>> package and distro maintainers are going to take a peek at Makefile.am file, especially when they
>> are interested in running tests before releasing their package. Anyhow, this isn't probably the best
>> place to put this kind of information.
>
> Ufff.. I'm against moving to readme. I hope nobody expect itw (*few*  people really)  developers is
> interested in file. Not even maintainers.
>
> The reproducers are described on wikipage[1], which is still moreover correct.
>
> Actually when somebody developing ITW is looking for this whitelist, the makefile would be his
> better friend, or not?
>
> The testing part of readme is directed to different audition. And the section of reproducers is
> intentionally missing.
>>
>> Besides, please check the spelling before checking in: palce -> place.
>> Are the regexes really separated by a simple space character and not by a new line character? What
> Sure, it is IFS as it is iterated in simle loop.
>> about test names with spaces? One could probably escape those with \x20 or \u0020, I guess. But I
>
> Sure it is IFS what is used to iterate over the IFS separate strings. So by default \n \t and space
>
>
> The spaces in the regexes are generally not supported, but you can workaround itr by knowledge that
> it is expt match:
>
> As names with spaces are supported for reproducers. The way how to use those in filter is:
> .*text\swith\sspaces where \s is wild char for any type of space in bas regex
>
> see:
> [jvanek at jvanek ~]$ expr match "a a" "a\sa"
> 3
> [jvanek at jvanek ~]$ expr match "a a" "asa"
> 0
> [jvanek at jvanek ~]$ expr match "a a" "a a"
> 3
>
>
>> just would like to make sure the format gets properly documented. ;-)
>
> Long story short, I would like to stay with current patch as it is - of course with fixed spelling
> and enriched info as you wished.
>
> Are you ok with it?
>
like this.. attached.

> Jie -does the code works for you?
> J.
>>
>>> +ECHO_WHITELIST=if [ -f $(REPRODUCERS_CLASS_WHITELIST) ] ; then cat $(REPRODUCERS_CLASS_WHITELIST)
>>> ; else echo ".*" ; fi
>>>  if ENABLE_WHITELIST
>>> -COMPILE_WHITELIST_FILTER=`cat $(REPRODUCERS_CLASS_WHITELIST)`
>>> +COMPILE_WHITELIST_FILTER=`$(ECHO_WHITELIST)`
>>>  RUN_WHITELIST_FILTER=.*
>>>  else
>>>  COMPILE_WHITELIST_FILTER=.*
>>> -RUN_WHITELIST_FILTER=`cat $(REPRODUCERS_CLASS_WHITELIST)`
>>> +RUN_WHITELIST_FILTER=`$(ECHO_WHITELIST)`
>>>  endif
>>>
>>>  if WITH_RHINO
>>
>
> [1] http://icedtea.classpath.org/wiki/Reproducers
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mandatoryWhiteLIst2.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/attachments/20150224/d1a40bb3/mandatoryWhiteLIst2.patch>