Re: Test suite

[Dumas Patrice]

> No wonder -- there are no guidelines as far as actual test
> implementation.  Different packages need different things.  So, don't
> worry about it, we should just do whatever works best for us.

I had a look at dejagnu and gawk test suite. dejagnu is unsuitable and
the gawk test suite is much like what I did for texi2html.

> As far as makeinfo goes, I did not create "reference output" files, but
> instead grepped the output for the constructs in question.  Having
> reference output files is probably better, though.

It has advantages and drawbacks. The advantage is that more is tested, 
the drawback is that if you change a very little thing, say a space you'll 
have a lot of changes.

> I would love to incorporate your tests into Texinfo.  I would love it
> even more if you incorporated them :).  Is there a driver script for
> each test?  That is all that matters as far as automake is concerned.

No, there is a big script, as basically the same thing is done for all the
files (call some programs with a a given set of options, test return value, 
compare with reference). I think that a workable
solution would be to have a generic script which would be called or
sourced in manual specific scripts, these scripts would be listed in 
the Makefile.am.

Does it seems right ?

Pat