<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/11/2013 11:54 AM, Alan Bateman
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:52A8C2E5.7010505@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
On 11/12/2013 19:26, Balchandra Vaidya wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:52A8BC76.60409@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
:<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:52A8A72C.7050300@oracle.com" type="cite">Alternatively,
that segment of the script could be a candidate for a target
in <br>
one or more test/Makefile files. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
This is good idea, but my experience with the 'make' is that if
one target critically fail, all<br>
subsequent targets will not run. I thought it is a restriction
of 'make'.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
I think Jon is suggesting that the subset that you run be added to
TEST.groups (which will automatically turn it a make targe as way
of the jdk_% rule ). On the surface this is a good idea but when I
look at the subset of the tests that you are running:<br>
<br>
:jdk_core<br>
:jdk_svc<br>
:jdk_beans<br>
:jdk_imageio<br>
:jdk_sound<br>
:jdk_sctp<br>
javax/accessibility <br>
com/sun/java/swing <br>
javax/print<br>
sun/pisces <br>
com/sun/awt <br>
<br>
then it's a bit ad hoc. I wouldn't object to adding a special
group for this but it really amounts to all jdk tests except for:<br>
<br>
java/awt<br>
javax/swing<br>
sun/awt<br>
sun/java2d<br>
com/apple/eawt<br>
<br>
If these tests aren't in your runs because of stability issues
then we should make sure that there are bugs submitted and that
they get some focus. In the interim then unstable tests can be
@ignore-d or added to the exclude list. I initially thought that
part of the issue was the othervm vs. agentvm discussion but I see
in TEST.ROOT that othervm.dirs lists these directories already.<br>
<br>
-Alan<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes, the high order point I was trying to make is that something is
wrong if you need to specify a long list of tests to run. While we
all may take whatever short cuts we choose to get our day to day
work done, there should be a standard set of tests[1] that we agree
should be run, and which can be run with reasonably concise command
line args.<br>
<br>
-- Jon<br>
<br>
Ideally, "all" but maybe we're not there yet.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>