On Monday 23 December 2013 11:43:39 Alex Merry wrote: > On 23/12/13 08:36, David Faure wrote: > > Still, replacing tests that pass means introducing the risk that we're not > > testing for the same thing anymore. But if you're fully convinced, go > > ahead. I wouldn't have rewritten these, but I don't want to veto the > > change. > > > > In fact my thinking when writing this test was: the whole point of > > kstandarddirs is to find installed files. As soon as we test something > > else, we lose the guarantee that it's indeed finding what the user just > > installed.... I admit that this was a "setup test" in addition to being a > > "unit test" though, and build.kde.org has a bit of a strange setup :) > > I see your point; given that this is only kde4support, I'll go for the > less invasive route of fixing the logic that determines when it should > skip the tests (so it skips when kde4support is not installed yet). > > Either way, the tests will fail is KDEDIRS is not set correctly; I think > the right approach there is to do a bit of a sanity check in > initTestCase() and bail (with either QSKIP or QFAIL) if it is either > empty or does not contain at least the install directory.
Or we can just set it with a qputenv? ;) -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE, in particular KDE Frameworks 5 _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
