You're right. I forgot about the tests that check something will fail with invalid input.
Rigtht now, I only get 3 failures in nepomuk (without QT_FATAL_WARNINGS). And kglobaltest fails only when I have QT_NO_GLIB=1 (I used to have it because of flash plugin, but not any longer). I'll check from time to time some applications with QT_FATAL_WARNINGS=1 then. Best Regards. 2010/12/9 David Faure <fa...@kde.org>: > On Tuesday 07 December 2010, Jaime wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've run the kdelibs with the environment variable QT_FATAL_WARNINGS=1, >> and the number of failed tests has grown in a noticeable way. (also with 2 >> crashes). >> >> I guess that less Qt warnings usually means less unexpected crashes. >> Therefore I suggest to add that variable to the test target, and if it is >> possible, to fix the failed unittests before 4.6.0 is released. > > I disagree that this makes sense. > > $ ./kconfigguitest > ********* Start testing of KConfigTest ********* > Config: Using QTest library 4.7.0, Qt 4.7.0 > PASS : KConfigTest::initTestCase() > PASS : KConfigTest::testComplex() > QWARN : KConfigTest::testInvalid() QColor::setNamedColor: Unknown color name > '1' > > Yes, this will crash with QT_FATAL_WARNINGS. So? It's good to have a unit test > test border conditions too, even if these conditions lead to warnings from Qt. > > I think this setting makes sense for applications, but not for unit tests. > > On the other hand I'm more interested in what failures you see -without- > QT_FATAL_WARNINGS? > > -- > David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr > Sponsored by Nokia to work on KDE, incl. Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org). >
