On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:28 PM, David Levin le...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote:
We could do this, but we'd have to add logic to track when directories
were done, and arbitrarily delay printing results about other
directories
Sigh. Now from the right email address.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@google.com wrote:
I thought we had agreed on printing out any unexpected failures in
real-time, no?
Also, I do think it would be worthwhile to print each directory as it
finishes. We're getting to the
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@google.com wrote:
I thought we had agreed on printing out any unexpected failures in
real-time, no?
Also, I do think it would be worthwhile to print each directory as it
finishes. We're getting to the point where we shard all the big
Have you considered making the output closer to that of WebKit's
run-webkit-tests?
It seems that would ease the hopeful transition to this version upstream.
dave
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi all,
If you never run the webkit layout tests, you
Yes, I did consider that. The fatal flaw in that plan is that the
webkit test script is single-threaded and runs through the tests in
order. Ours doesn't, and so we can't easily guarantee the same sort of
output they have. Eric and I will probably work through this as we
upstream the code. I'm
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote:
We could do this, but we'd have to add logic to track when directories
were done, and arbitrarily delay printing results about other
directories (hence delaying and serializing results). This might end
up causing
