> That's fine, but then that's the justification, not "junit interprets > warn as fail". Note that some (regular) piglit tests will also emit > "warn", and they don't mean "fail". I believe that junit needs to be > fixed to not interpret warn as fail irrespective of what happens in > deqp. But for the record, I don't use junit. > > I'm not sure how I feel about the "warn" output in piglit in general, > it seems a bit weird. Bogus and intermittent warnings certainly sound > like a problem, and perhaps that's reason enough to just ignore them.
I'm fine with either solution. Warn is kind of an odd status. Basically if a test passes, but there is anything unexpected in stderr, the test will get marked warn. (I think some other suites use it differently, maybe igt?) Dylan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
