On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 at 23:02, Bertho Stultiens <l...@vagrearg.org> wrote:
> An additional test can be in runtests(.in):
> ----
> wait_for_result_close() {
> ....
Would you like to make that a PR into 2.9? I think that that will make
CI run it in the feature branch, so we can see how it goes on the
serversm and I can try it on my system too. I am seeing the mb2hal
fails on my 2.9 branch too, so for whatever reason I have a good test
setup.
This might explain some of the semi-random tests fails we see.
> It might be an idea to add a test for the 'stderr' file too?
That sounds like a good idea on initial consideration. We might need
to check whether stderr is closed, or if perhaps some tests write to
it in checkresult.
> Are there /any/ tests that check results on any other output than the
> 'result' file? If not, then it should work for all scenarios.
Some tests run a specific script (possibly Tcl) to determine
pass/fail. But the runtests script is pretty understandable in that
regard, it's easy enough to put the "is file closed" tests in the
right places.
--
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is
designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and
lunatics."
— George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1912
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
