Nadeem Vawda <nadeem.va...@gmail.com> added the comment: > I have attached a Python script which does what Antoine's patch does except > which is expected to live in Tools/scripts. The perk of doing this in a > Python script is that Windows users will be able to simply execute the script > while the Makefile can be made to execute the script itself for those that > prefer ``make test`` over ``./python Tools/scripts/run_tests.py``.
I've attached a patch that reworks the Makefile test targets to use this script (with some minor modifications). Some notes: - By doing things this way, we lose the ability to specify custom arguments to the interpreter with $(TESTPYTHONOPTS). Might this be a problem? - The "test" and "quicktest" targets now use "-u all,-largefile,-audio,-gui", which permits more tests to be run. On my current system, this adds about 20s to the running time for "make test" (~3m45s instead of ~3m25s). - regrtest.py now accepts "-u none", explicitly specifying the default setting (to override the setting used by run_tests.py). This isn't strictly necessary, but it seemed good to have, for the sake of completeness. - I've changed the meaning of "-j 1" -- instead of using a single subprocess, it runs the tests directly in the current process. This allows us to use the run_tests.py script for "make buildbottest" and still have the exact same semantics (using even one subprocess can cause problems for e.g. test_curses). Any thoughts? ---------- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22815/test-runner.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11651> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
