On 07/06/2011 07:24 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Xan Lopez<x...@gnome.org> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Eric Seidel<e...@webkit.org> wrote:
NRWT uses both! It will read in all the port's Skipped files, covert
them to SKIP text_expectations, and add them to your test_expectations
file.
http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/layout_tests/port/webkit.py#L309
For better or worse, NRWT will error out, if you have duplicates in
your test_expectations file, including duplicates between your
test_expectations file and your Skipped lists.
Right, this is what I meant in another email when I said you are not
supposed to use both. Cannot really see a sane use case for this to be
honest. When I transitioned I basically converted Skipped locally to
the new format, got tons of duplicated errors, figured out what was
going on and deleted then deleted Skipped. Maybe this is done so that
you can leave Skipped as it is and start gradually adding stuff to the
new file?
This was done to make it possible to bring up NRWT on Mac over a year
ago. :) I'm happy to look at moving to a different configuration now
that the project has (mostly) moved to NRWT.
So long term the best is to move from Skipped to text_expectations. But
I worry about the lack of the cascading logic. At some point we decided
that we need it in the old system. Why do we think that we won't need it
with NRWT? I think the cascading reduce the cost of maintaining the
skipped lists. WebKit2 is the best example. We have a common skip list
that lists all the tests that are failing due to a common WebKit2
specific reason. In that way, I can skip tests that appearing when I
work and Apple folks are sleeping and they don't need to worry about
that and the same is true in the reverse direction.
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
