[Swan-dev] sanitize.sh vs re-sanitize.sh (vs swantest.sh)
andrew.cagney at gmail.com
Tue May 26 16:18:48 EEST 2015
On 25 May 2015 at 18:00, Antony Antony <antony at phenome.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 04:38:18PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > Just fyi,
> > I've done some merging into re-sanitize.sh:
> > - it leaves empty diffs around, somewhat annoying but useful - another
> > to verify things are working
> > - exits non-zero if it thinks the test failed
> > - checks for more failure conditions
> > after more testing we can look at it replacing sanitize.sh
> please not yet!
> why not swantest do the grep and those checks?
re-sanitize.sh and pluto-testlist-scan.sh are nice compact scripts, each
with a singular job.
It might be better to just keep them separate (on the other hand, having
the decision that a test passed in multiple places isn't good).
my intention is to move towards python one. that is why swantest has check
> for core file... expect...
> . swantest create json, to generate html, and table.txt for one line
> summary. shell scripts are not ideal to create json files.
> > > re-sanitize.sh
> > > - run from pluto-testlist-scan.sh (nice script)
> > > swantest
> > > - checks for for crashes and assert failures
> swantest also produce table.txt file which will be consitant with json
> file and similar to pluto-testlist-scan.sh's output.
Yes, it would be nice to be able to run that standalone.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Swan-dev