(thanks by the way)
> On 26 April 2015 at 18:39, Arthur Schwarz <aschwarz1...@att.net> wrote: > > Now for the case you mentioned in identifying a program, which is > > really a test case renamed in the manual for mystifying and unknowable > > reasons. Well, there is no mechanism for "The first non-option > > argument passed to the test driver is the program to be run, and all > > the following ones are command-line options and arguments for this program." Let's go through some of options. > > > > Suppose command line arguments are input on the command line (seems > > reasonable huh). > > I think you are wrong there. When it says command-line, it means a command line in a Makefile recipe. You will see it by looking at any Makefile.in generated from a Makefile.am with tests. It will look > like: > > t/file.sh.log: t/file.sh > @p='t/file.sh'; \ > b='t/file.sh'; \ > $(am__check_pre) $(LOG_DRIVER) --test-name "$$f" \ > --log-file $$b.log --trs-file $$b.trs \ > $(am__common_driver_flags) $(AM_LOG_DRIVER_FLAGS) > $(LOG_DRIVER_FLAGS) -- $(LOG_COMPILE) \ > "$$tst" $(AM_TESTS_FD_REDIRECT) > > You can see the command-line options like --test-name etc. Now this (almost) makes sense. Let me see here. The "command line input" is not a command line input, it is a test driver option input via Makefile.am something. Now I don't understand automake/Makefile.am/make well enough to even begin to interpret your example, but the manual provides no guidance and for me, that's the point. I can follow directions. There are no directions. As a point, 15.3.3.1 Command-line arguments for test drivers shows all options as having the syntax "--option=value". Your example does not have this syntax. Will your example work? Should this be in the manual, as in "--option[=| ]value?" By the way, you have "@p='t/file.sh'" and --test-name "$$f". Do you mean --test-name "$$p"? > > > > Oh, about the example. The automake variable can't be used for > > anything but scripts, see 15 Support for test suites "The other (and > > most used) form is based on the use of generic test scripts, and its > > activation is triggered by the definition of the special TESTS > > variable." This quite clearly says that anytime that a TESTS variable > > is seen then generic scripts are used. But the example has "TESTS = > > foo.pl bar.py baz" which are not generic scripts. It must mean that > > the test driver is a generic script, but oh wait. The test drivers are > > for PERL and PYTHON and scripts. And (last time I looked) PERL and PYTHON were not generic scripts. > > They could be run the same way as shell scripts, as long as they have the right "#!" header. A test case as given in TEST=testcase, can be an executable program, not a script. The documentation is still faulty although I should have been clearer. TEST_EXTENSION = .@EXEEXT @EXEEXT_LOG_DRIVER= ... I suppose can be used to define an executable program (which can not be converted into a script). It should be clear that I do not have extensive experience in constructing make scripts. But I can read. What I am trying to do is run a blasted test. I rely exclusively on the documentation. The documentation seems not to provide direction so I am forced to scrutinize each sentence to determine its meaning. As a student in reading a text book I saw "... and the rest is left as an exercise to the student." This is not a text book, it is a manual. I expect things not to be left as an exercise.
