151 lines
6.2 KiB
Plaintext
151 lines
6.2 KiB
Plaintext
To run the tests:
|
|
|
|
$ make check
|
|
|
|
Note that if your /bin/sh doesn't support shell functions, you'll
|
|
have to try something like this, where "/bin/sh5" is replaced by the
|
|
pathname of a shell which handles normal shell functions:
|
|
|
|
$ make SHELL=/bin/sh5 check
|
|
|
|
Also note that you must be logged in as a regular user, not root.
|
|
|
|
WARNING: This test can take quite a while to run, esp. if your
|
|
disks are slow or over-loaded.
|
|
|
|
The tests work in /tmp/cvs-sanity (which the tests create) by default.
|
|
If for some reason you want them to work in a different directory, you
|
|
can set the TESTDIR environment variable to the desired location
|
|
before running them.
|
|
|
|
You will probably need GNU expr, which is part of the GNU sh-utils
|
|
package. This is just for running the tests; CVS itself doesn't
|
|
require expr.
|
|
|
|
If there is some unexpected output, that is a failure which can be
|
|
somewhat hard to track down. Finding out which test is producing the
|
|
output is not always easy. The newer tests (that is, ones using
|
|
dotest*) will not have this problem, but there are many old tests
|
|
which have not been converted.
|
|
|
|
If running the tests produces the output "FAIL:" followed by the name
|
|
of the test that failed, then the details on the failure are in the
|
|
file check.log. If it says "exit status is " followed by a number,
|
|
then the exit status of the command under test was not what the test
|
|
expected. If it says "** expected:" followed by a regular expression
|
|
followed by "** got:" followed by some text, then the regular
|
|
expression is the output which the test expected, and the text is the
|
|
output which the command under test actually produced. In some cases
|
|
you'll have to look closely to see how they differ.
|
|
|
|
If output from "make remotecheck" is out of order compared to what is
|
|
expected (for example,
|
|
|
|
a
|
|
b
|
|
cvs foo: this is a demo
|
|
|
|
is expected and
|
|
|
|
a
|
|
cvs foo: this is a demo
|
|
b
|
|
|
|
is output), this is probably a well-known bug in the CVS server
|
|
(search for "out-of-order" in src/server.c for a comment explaining
|
|
the cause). It is a real pain in running the testsuite, but if you
|
|
are lucky and/or your machine is fast and/or lightly loaded, you won't
|
|
run into it. Running the tests again might succeed if the first run
|
|
failed in this manner.
|
|
|
|
For more information on what goes in check.log, and how the tests are
|
|
run in general, you'll have to read sanity.sh. Depending on just what
|
|
you are looking for, and how familiar you are with the Bourne shell
|
|
and regular expressions, it will range from relatively straightforward
|
|
to obscure.
|
|
|
|
If you choose to submit a bug report based on tests failing, be
|
|
aware that, as with all bug reports, you may or may not get a
|
|
response, and your odds might be better if you include enough
|
|
information to reproduce the bug, an analysis of what is going
|
|
wrong (if you have the time to provide one), etc. The check.log
|
|
file is the first place to look.
|
|
|
|
ABOUT STDOUT AND STDERR
|
|
***********************
|
|
|
|
The sanity.sh test framework combines stdout and stderr and for tests
|
|
to pass requires that output appear in the given order. Some people
|
|
suggest that ordering between stdout and stderr should not be
|
|
required, or to put it another way, that the out-of-order bug referred
|
|
to above, and similar behaviors, should be considered features, or at
|
|
least tolerable. The reasoning behind the current behavior is that
|
|
having the output appear in a certain order is the correct behavior
|
|
for users using CVS interactively--that users get confused if the
|
|
order is unpredictable.
|
|
|
|
ABOUT TEST FRAMEWORKS
|
|
*********************
|
|
|
|
People periodically suggest using dejagnu or some other test
|
|
framework. A quick look at sanity.sh should make it clear that there
|
|
are indeed reasons to be dissatisfied with the status quo. Ideally a
|
|
replacement framework would achieve the following:
|
|
|
|
1. Widely portable, including to a wide variety of unices, NT, Win95,
|
|
OS/2, VMS, probably DOS and Win3, etc.
|
|
|
|
2. Nicely match extended regular expressions of unlimited length.
|
|
|
|
3. Be freely redistributable, and if possible already the kind of
|
|
thing people might have already installed. The harder it is to get
|
|
and install the framework, the less people will run the tests.
|
|
|
|
The various contenders are:
|
|
|
|
* Bourne shell and GNU expr (the status quo). Falls short on #1
|
|
(we've only tried unix and NT, although MKS might help with other DOS
|
|
mutants). #3 is pretty good (the main dependency is GNU expr which is
|
|
fairly widely available).
|
|
|
|
* Bourne shell with a new regexp matcher we would distribute with
|
|
CVS. This means maintaining a regexp matcher and the makefiles which
|
|
go with it. Not clearly a win over Bourne shell and GNU expr.
|
|
|
|
* Bourne shell, and use sed to remove variable portions of output, and
|
|
thus produce a form that can be compared with cmp or diff (this
|
|
sidesteps the need for a full regular expression matcher as mentioned
|
|
in #2 above). The C News tests are said to work this way. This would
|
|
appear to rely on variable portions of output having a certain syntax
|
|
and might spuriously recognize them out of context (this issue needs
|
|
more investigation; it isn't clear how big a problem it is in
|
|
practice). Same portability issues as the other choices based on the
|
|
Bourne shell.
|
|
|
|
* Dejagnu. This is overkill; most of dejagnu is either unnecessary
|
|
(e.g. libraries for communicating with target boards) or undesirable
|
|
(e.g. the code which stats every file in sight to find the tests). On
|
|
the plus side, dejagnu is probably closer than any of the other
|
|
choices to having everything which is needed already there.
|
|
|
|
* Write our own small framework directly in tcl and distribute with
|
|
CVS. The tests would look much like dejagnu tests, but we'd avoid the
|
|
unnecessary baggage. The only dependency would be on tcl (that is,
|
|
wish).
|
|
|
|
* perl or python or <any other serious contenders here?>
|
|
|
|
It is worth thinking about how to:
|
|
|
|
a. include spaces in arguments which we pass to the program under
|
|
test (sanity.sh dotest cannot do this; see test rcs-9 for a
|
|
workaround).
|
|
|
|
b. pass stdin to the program under test (sanity.sh, again, handles
|
|
this by bypassing dotest).
|
|
|
|
c. have a send-expect type dialog with the program under test
|
|
(e.g. see server-7 or pserver-4 which want to talk the CVS
|
|
protocol, or the many tests which need to answer the prompt of "cvs
|
|
release", e.g. deep-5).
|