Supporting WSL in shell tests; was Re: [PATCH] Fix for EXE_SUFFIX being set for WSL having no effect

Jonathan Gibbons jonathan.gibbons at
Wed Jan 23 21:56:28 UTC 2019

On 1/23/19 1:49 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> On 1/23/19 1:12 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote:
>> I think it is only natural to expect folks to debug shell tests 
>> directly. If we accept this assumption, then, is there any reasonable 
>> alternative to “uname"? There is a “systeminfo” tool on windows, not 
>> sure if it helps. We really need to know what “uname -s” outputs, 
>> though, as it might still work.
> It would help if we could crowd-source a table showing the value on 
> different systems.
> -- jon

... but that being said, `uname` will test the system being used to run 
the shell script; it seems we need to distinguish the different kinds of 
JDK we might be wanting to test ... i.e is the JDK a "Linux JDK" or a 
"WIndows JDK". You won't get that from `uname`, since (as I understand 
it) the WSL world can invoke either sort of JDK.

This seems to be the thinking behind Andrew's suggestion of providing 
WSL_TARGET, but it just seems weird, in his proposed text, to be testing 
WSL_TARGET when we might not be running on WSL.

-- Jon

More information about the quality-discuss mailing list