Hi Marcel, About unit test, I was thinking more about something which uses directly core's parts (might require some file linking on fs, at build time). This would avoid code duplicates. And then, what about doing unit tests via CUnit? Or do you prefer without any framework, like Daniel did for Session unit test in ConnMan? (cunit is trivial to use and gives quite nice output though)
For unit test I was planning to have files containing: a manual configuration (and/or a pac file path) and many test uri with respective result. Something like that, which would let us testing pac and manual based proxy configuration at the same time. So, I would implement first the manual feature into the core and then (or at same time) work on this unit test. Br, Tomasz Le 19/12/2011 16:59, Marcel Holtmann a écrit : > Hi Tomasz, > >> Makefile.am | 5 +- >> tools/manual_proxy_test.c | 778 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 782 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 tools/manual_proxy_test.c > small nitpick here, use manual-proxy-test.c as file name. So we are bit > more consistent across projects. > > I am fine with applying this tool, but what about turning it into a unit > test or taking pieces and making a unit test out of it? > > Regards > > Marcel > > > _______________________________________________ > connman mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman > _______________________________________________ connman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman
