On 4/11/2013 1:57 AM, Neil wrote: > Gregory Szorc wrote: > >> We should eventually be able to get to a state where there are no >> moz.build/Makefile.in files in test directories. Well, at least for >> test suites using manifests to define test files (xpcshell, >> mochitest, reftest, possibly others). >> > Do these manifests include associated files (e.g. iframes, images?)
Presumably, yes. > >> Now, the real question is whether we still generate Makefile for >> these directories. If everyone used mach commands for running tests, >> we wouldn't need Makefile or their targets to invoke per-directory >> tests. >> > Don't mochitests use TEST_PATH from the root Makefile? I can't > remember which tests need a per-directory Makefile but it might > include xpcshell tests. > My memory is foggy since I've been using mach exclusively for months. But, I know xpcshell tests have you invoking a leaf Makefile. e.g. |make -C services/sync/tests xpcshell-tests| or |SOLO_FILE=test_foo.js make -C services/sync/tests|. What makes it confusing is the xpcshell test directory doesn't usually contain a Makefile, so you have to know where XPCSHELL_TESTS is defined. Since mach talks directly to the xpcshell test harness, you just need to give it a path to a test file or directory and it "just works." Not to mention you can just type |mach help xpcshell-test| to see how you can influence test execution. Try doing that with make! Once the build system is aware of the type of every test, my plan is to expose a |mach test <path>| that automagically invokes the appropriate test runner(s). We could even go a step further and do |mach do <path>|. If the path is a .cpp, it gets compiled. If it's a test, it gets executed. There's a lot of magic you can do once annotations are in moz.build files... _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
