On Aug 17, 2006, at 3:28 PM, Anton Luht wrote:
Not yet. I think that making minimal test cases from JUnit tests is
simpler than making ones from an application though. I'm going to get
down to it soon - I just wanted to discuss it before acting to make
sure that nobody objects such approach.
Oh - when I've tallked about "app oriented" testing, I didn't mean we
have to slap the app into a test framework, but rather that we go out
and find 'real-world' software (which I lazily labeled
"applications") to help flush out bugs.
So, yes, this is really great if you've used the mx4j test suite to
find Harmony bugs, and if you turn them into tests for us. Go!
geir
On 8/17/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
that's a great idea.
Have you isolated any of the errors?
geir
On Aug 17, 2006, at 10:40 AM, Anton Luht wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Now some people in this list are trying to make ActiveMQ run on
> Harmony. ActiveMQ is based on MX4J [1] . MX4J 3.0.1 has 812 unit
> tests. Results of those tests:
>
> BEA WebLogic JRockit(TM) 1.4.2_04 JVM :
> 810 tests, 1 failure, 1 error (99.75%)
>
> Harmony DRLVM version 11.2.0
> 766 tests, 2 failures, 110 errors (85.38%)
>
> Maybe it's worth to consider MX4j JUnit tests first and then try to
> fix ActiveMQ?
>
> MX4J is used not only in ActiveMQ but in other apps like Tomcat as
> well.
>
> [1] http://mx4j.sourceforge.net
--
Regards,
Anton Luht,
Intel Middleware Products Division
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
