On 16 May 2010 14:35, Karl Hammar <[email protected]> wrote: > Does it matter, if not, why is in the contributor manual ?
I think the instructions were lifted directly from the old (2.10) docs, so there may well have been changes to the test suite since they were written. TBH, when I started doing regression test checks, I bumbled along until I found something which worked. The important point is this comment: ## redo files differing from baseline If you haven't done `make check' after applying a patch, then the only files which will be retested will be the ones showing up in the initial test. I think the point of `make test-redo' is to speed up the process when working on a patch, since it only rebuilds the snippets which have changed. > It has an "make check" after the test-baseline which you don't have, is > it redundant? I've never followed that step; it seems like complete waste of time. > git-apply and patch -p1 produces the same result, so that is not the > cause of our different output: Correct. > Isn't the diff a complete statement of what you want to change? > Also you *did* cite the diff. Yes, but it was easier for me to pluck the relevant parts out than link to the individual files on Rietveld. Cheers, Neil _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
