[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] {maint} tests: improve tests on "maintainer-clean" target
From: |
Stefano Lattarini |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] {maint} tests: improve tests on "maintainer-clean" target |
Date: |
Thu, 31 Mar 2011 22:03:01 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.30-2-686; KDE/4.4.4; i686; ; ) |
On Thursday 31 March 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 03:27:18PM CEST:
> > On Wednesday 30 March 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > >
> > > A general comment: if you keep on adding tests to maint, it will break
> > > branch-1.11 in the long run, in the sense that the branch will not be
> > > releasable any more without splitting up the test suite, or improving
> > > the test suite driver as discussed before, as it will not work any more
> > > on MinGW/MSYS. Please keep this in mind.
> > >
> > How much room is left, approximately?
>
> I haven't tested on MinGW recently, and haven't tested branch-1.11 in a
> longer while. The limit was 32K for argv plus environment IIRC.
>
But then we should be pretty safe on both maint and master:
$ (cd tests && echo *.test | wc -c)
11154 # maint
16089 # master
Even considering the extra code in the Makefile rules, these values
are waaay below the upper length limit of MSYS/MinGW. Then, why have
you experienced failures due to command-line length on MSYS/MinGW?
I'm confused ...
> > I have no big problems in applying
> > this patch to master only, but I'd rather keep it in maint unless we are
> > already dangerously near to the MinGW/MSYS upper limit.
>
> Well, apply it based on maint,
>
The patch is already based on maint ... but then, should I apply it to
maint, or merge it to master only?
> and let's strive for leaving rougly 6K for tests we may still want to
> introduce, plus environment.
Regards,
Stefano