On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:46:58AM +0100, Stephan Witt wrote: > > Yes, I understood this. But for the first try I didn't want to run it in > parallel. > I've observed that e.g. kpsewhich is used heavily while testing and one call > took ~10ms. > Perhaps there is some tuning possible?
My guess is that there's a lot of tuning to be done. Kornel has already improved a lot (thanks to him we can run tests in parallel) but I'm guessing that you're right that some tweaks could improve things. > But I'd guess, there is a significant overhead > for the first time to generate all the required pieces like compiled fonts > etc. > To check this now I'm starting the test again. Ah interesting. I would be interested in whether the second run was faster. I find that 11 hours is very slow even with just one core. If it is expected to be slow on the first run, it would be nice to document this (I'm currently working on a patch for Development.lyx). > 1st question: wouldn't it be useful to split the tests into groups and > enable the tests which should pass on a basic system automatically? > How could this be done? I don't think it's good to have to enable the > export tests explicitly. Yes this would be nice. In addition to Kornel's point that it increases configuration time, it increases the time it takes to run the tests, which is understandably a reason why many do not run the tests. > 2nd question: which tests should succeed with a "normal" TeX installation? Would be good to know. If you give me an idea of what you mean by a "normal" TeX installation I can tell you (I'll set up a virtual machine). Would a full TeX Live installation be what you have in mind or do you mean something more basic? Scott
