Hi Jim, On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 16:31 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > Now that automake-1.11 will soon be hitting F9, F10, F11, > you may want to use some of its features. > > Parallel tests is can be useful when you run parallel > "make check" on a multi-core system. > E.g., consider running "make -j9 check" on a quad-core system:
Heh .. yeah, I am usually even more reckless and just run 'make -j check' ;) > It took about 70 seconds before the changes. > Adding automake's parallel-tests option shaved off only 5 or 10s > due to the fact that so much time was spent in a single test: > test-lenses.sh > After splitting test-lenses.sh into its 54 separately-runnable tests, > and moving long-running tests "up" in the list, so that they start sooner, > a parallel "make check" completes in under 30 seconds. Nice .. running the tests was getting to the point where it was starting to annoy me ;) > Oddly, sometimes lens-grub.sh takes over 50(!) seconds and makes the total > test time approach 70s. Other times it completes in just 5 seconds. The grub lens contains some truly heinous regular expression, since it also parses the Debian-specific embedded comments for update-grub. > $ for i in $(seq 10); do > env time --format %e \ > ./augparse --nostdinc -I ../lenses ../lenses/tests/test_grub.aug > done Strange .. I get runtimes that are pretty consistently 5s +/- .1s; I'll run this for a little longer. Did you build with any special CFLAGS ? But even when I build with CFLAGS='-O2 -g' and when I use the augparse from the 0.5.0 RPM on my F10 machine, I get a very consistent picture. > -------------------------------- > > automake's colorized-tests option is ok. > Colors "PASS" in green and "FAIL" in red. > Other colors for XPASS and XFAIL. No big deal. > > Likewise, I like silent-rules, but it's no big deal. I don't have automake-1.11 on my F10 machine yet; before pushing it, I'd like to play with it a little. I'll do that in the next few days. > ---------- > > Along the way, I noticed that "make distcheck" was failing due to > fa_sym.version not being distributed. That's the 3rd patch below. Cool .. pushed that one. > ---------- > > As to whether it's ok to depend on automake-1.11, realize that > the only people who will need it are those who build from a > cloned directory. If you build from a tarball, you don't need > any version of automake. And if you're developing, you can > be expected to use the latest versions of autoconf and automake. Yeah, I don't have big philosophical problems with requiring the latest autotools - I do want to wait though until they've hit the Fedora stable repos, even on my behind-the-curve F10 setup ;) David _______________________________________________ augeas-devel mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/augeas-devel
