On 1/22/10 11:45 PM, "Mark Polesky" <markpole...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> I've never used make test-redo or make test-clean. I'd
>> like to have some clarification on what they're used for.
>
> I could be wrong, but it looks like `test-redo' accomplishes
> (automatically) what you're doing manually in your step "run
> the individual regression files..." The CG says that it
> will "redo files differing from baseline".
Not quite the same. In order to redo files differing from the baseline
you need to first have a make check complete.
When I'm working on a bug, the bug is demonstrated in a particular
regression test. I want to test that regression test (and only that
regression test) until I have the regression solved.
It takes a long time to run the whole regression test suite; it takes almost
no time to run a single regression test.
>
>> My cycle is to
>>
>> [edit source files]
>> make (if needed)
>
> You lost me there. How will I know if `make' is needed? I
> wonder if `test-redo' does this as well, whatever it is...
As John mentioned, you must do make if you edit a c++ file, a
header file. If you only edit .scm or .ly files, you don't need
make.
>
>> run the individual regression files to see that the
>> regression is solved
>> Once I'm pretty sure it's right, I run
>> make check
>> to make sure I haven't broken anything.
>
> One last question: You use `-j' and `CPU_COUNT' for
> `make doc'. Graham recommends using `-j' but not
> `CPU_COUNT' for `make'. Are there any other `make' targets
> that would benefit from either or both of these?
>
> Like:
> make -j3 test-baseline
> make -j3 CPU_COUNT=3 check
-j3 is the option that allows make to use multiple processors in parallel;
CPU_COUNT=3 is the option that allows lilypond-book to use multiple
processors in parallel, IIUC.
HTH,
Carl
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
