On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 6:34 AM, Kornel Benko <[email protected]> wrote: > Am Freitag, 14. Dezember 2012 um 23:30:08, schrieb Tommaso Cucinotta > <[email protected]> > >> On 13/12/12 12:33, Kornel Benko wrote: > >> > Checking findadv-08-in.txt (Shouldn't we better create 3 logs here?) > >> > >> That's possible/useful, sure. Feel free to apply modifications. > > > > Did it locally now. > > > >> This is one of a few test cases where I had to increase the typing delay >> (KD: 200). > >> I just verified that commenting out that line the test fails, as it >> doesn't seem to > >> manage to check the needed option properly. As a rough guess, it seems >> like the GUI > >> manages to execute the [Enter] action before finishing the Alt+l, Alt+r >> actions > >> that are dispatched before -- increasing the waiting time there, fixed the >> issue. > >> Though, there are a few cases in which this problem returns, and depending >> on the > >> hardware and/or WM options, some of these tests may unnecessarily fail. > >> Sometimes, repeating the failing test leads to passing it, but I >> understand it's > >> not optimum. > > > > It does not help here. There is something fishy ... let me explain. > > > > The second part of findadv-08 test searches for 'Putting.*par 1' but here > the string is 'Putting.*par 2' > > If I change it to search for 'Putting.*par 2', the string is 'Putting.*par > 1' > > If I change to search for 'Putting.*par [12]', the string is 'Putting.*par > 3' > > > > it works ONLY, if I set the search string to 'Putting.*par [123]'. The > string in log-file is from this moment > > always 'par 3'. > > > > Something I don't understand is, why in the log appears 'Starting LyX . . .' > 9 times, (should it not be 3 times?) > > Env{MAX_LOOP} is set to 1 after all. > > Ooooh shit, it should be 'MAX_LOOPS' > > > > Now it works! And the test is faster! Phew! > > > >> As u said, till it's just me, but if there's at least someone else, and it >> becomes > >> integrated in a standard testing process, then I'd like to fix these >> issues. > >> > >> Can u pls try the attached test out ? > >> > >> > P.S. > >> > > >> > Sorry if the private mail is not what you prefer here, but as we are ATM >> > the only persons > >> > >> Yes, perhaps someone else gets curious and volunteers to help writing a >> couple of further tests. > > > > Testing may not be so exciting for everyone, I know. > > > >> T. >
Kornel, did you get all of the advanced find tests passing? I am still having the failures I mentioned in the other email. Thanks, Scott
