RE: [pooma-dev] RFA: Tiny Changes to tests/makefile's

[Julian C. Cummings]

Jeffrey,

These changes appear OK to me, although I'm a bit 
confused because it looks like some of the "run"
targets don't actually run the tests but just build
them.  Is that what you intended?  Anyway, making 
these targets have more uniform behavior for the
purposes of regression testing is a good thing.

Julian C.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeffrey Oldham [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 1:41 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: [pooma-dev] RFA: Tiny Changes to tests/makefile's
> 
> 
> As I worked toward a system that will automatically check for changes
> in Pooma regression tests, I discovered several testing makefiles that
> needed slight revisions.  Several did not contain `run' targets.
> Others needed small other changes.
> 
> OK to commit?
> 
> (These filenames are all relative to the `src' directory.)
> 
> 2001-06-25  Jeffrey D. Oldham  <address@hidden>
> 
>       * Connect/Lux/tests/makefile (run): New target.
>       * Connect/Paws/tests/makefile (run): Likewise.
>       * IO/tests/makefile (run_tests): Add dependence on `tests'.
>       * NewField/tests/makefile (field_tests): Add StencilTests.
>       * Partition/tests/makefile (run): New target.
>       * Pooma/tests/makefile (tests): Likewise.
>       (run): Likewise.
>       * Threads/tests/makefile: Likewise.
>       * Tulip/tests/ReduceOverContextsTest.cpp (main): Change function
>       call to object creation and then function call.
> 
> Tested on     sequential Linux using GNU make version 3.78.1
>                 by running "make run" in the associated test directory
> Approved by   ???you???
> 
> Thanks,
> Jeffrey D. Oldham
> address@hidden