On 8 September 2010 18:12, Vincent Ladeuil <email address hidden> wrote:
> >> Of course we should isolate the actual tests to ensure we don't
> >> grab any hidden dependencies though.
> >>
> >> A dedicated test suite for the installers sounds like a good plan
> >> anyway.
>
> > Just skip tests if we run bzr.exe -- it's easy to create Feature. The
> > check for bzr.exe is very simple:
>
> > getattr(sys, "frozen", None) is not None
>
> Sure. But adding a check to *all* existing tests ?
>
> I've thought about that for other needs, and invariably the answer is:
> creating a dedicated test suite (which could include exising tests) is
> way easier than forcing new constraints on all existing tests.
I think gz meant: any tests that just cannot pass when run from a
frozen bzr can easily skip. Most of them should not need to. Some
such were mentioned recently.
>
> And when I say dedicated test suite, it could be as simple as running:
>
> selftest -s bt.test_installer
>
> And these tests could well use the feature you mentioned above to skip
> in the normal case.
On 8 September 2010 18:12, Vincent Ladeuil <email address hidden> wrote:
> >> Of course we should isolate the actual tests to ensure we don't
> >> grab any hidden dependencies though.
> >>
> >> A dedicated test suite for the installers sounds like a good plan
> >> anyway.
>
> > Just skip tests if we run bzr.exe -- it's easy to create Feature. The
> > check for bzr.exe is very simple:
>
> > getattr(sys, "frozen", None) is not None
>
> Sure. But adding a check to *all* existing tests ?
>
> I've thought about that for other needs, and invariably the answer is:
> creating a dedicated test suite (which could include exising tests) is
> way easier than forcing new constraints on all existing tests.
I think gz meant: any tests that just cannot pass when run from a
frozen bzr can easily skip. Most of them should not need to. Some
such were mentioned recently.
>
> And when I say dedicated test suite, it could be as simple as running:
>
> selftest -s bt.test_installer
>
> And these tests could well use the feature you mentioned above to skip
> in the normal case.
That'd be good.
--
Martin