[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: tiny typoes
|
From: |
Tim Van Holder |
|
Subject: |
Re: tiny typoes |
|
Date: |
Wed, 19 Sep 2001 08:27:15 +0200 |
> # If you use the `AT_CHECK([command >out])' be sure to have the test
> -# suite introduces spurious failures.
> +# suite that introduces spurious failures.
Actually, this still sounds wrong.
This seems better:
So if you use `AT_CHECK([command >out])', you're sure to get a
test suite that will show spurious failures.
- tiny typoes, Alexey Mahotkin, 2001/09/18
- Re: tiny typoes,
Tim Van Holder <=