Bill McCarthy wrote:
> >> There is a `testdir' located in $VIMRUNTIME/src. There > >> doesn't appear to be any documentation of this, but there is > >> a set of tests that run from within various make files. > >> > >> I'm running in Windows.using Mingw. The makefile for > >> windows is apparently Make_dos.mak. The top of that file > >> mentioned that one needs typical unix utilities. However, > >> if you have the unix utilities, you very likely have at > >> least sh.exe and probably zsh.exe (the Bourne and Z-Shell). > > > Can't you use "Makefile", as used for Unix? However, I thought that > > MingW was supposed to just supply the compiler, not all the Unix tools > > like Cygwin. So Make_dos.mak would be more appropriate. > > Thanks for your speedy reply. No, Makefile does not work: > > > make > rm -f test.log > make: *** No rule to make target `../vim', needed by `test1.out'. Stop. > > You are correct that Mingw is not a complete package. One > needs to download the various unix utilities separately. > But one usually gets sh.exe also - I also got zsh.exe in one > of my downloads of unix utilities. [They don't all play well > with Windows, so one needs to test quite a bit.] Isn't it possible to make the tests work without the extra downloads? Using a testdir/Make_ming.mak, which mostly uses the DOS way of doing things should work, right? Adding a dependency on installing various other tools is not nice. > >> The GNU make command will use zsh (or sh if zsh is not > >> present). Only if neither of these are in your path is CMD > >> used - and you CAN use Make_dos.mak. > >> > >> I've created Make_dos_sh.mak which should work with either > >> sh.exe or zsh.exe - this is attached. When I ran it with > >> `make -f Make_dos_sh.mak', test54 failed with the following: > >> > >> cp test54.ok test.ok > >> ../vim -u dos.vim -U NONE --noplugin -s dotest.in test54.in > >> diff test.out test54.ok > >> diff: test.out: No such file or directory > >> make: *** [test54.out] Error 2 > >> > >> Am I the first one to ever run these tests in Windows? > > > This test uses Unix commands. They can probably be avoided, since the > > buffer-local autocommands don't require a shell command. > > Yes, the CMD command `rm -f' is a problem. I've removed > this bad test and added a comment to the top of the new file > (see attached). I've put a remark on the todo list to change test54. However, the todo list is very, very long... > >> When I run `make Make_dos_sh.mak clean' it cleans things up. > >> Are there other targets I should use for a full test or is > >> that accomplished with the make file? > >> > >> One little problem. The unix utility command `rm -f X*' > >> produces an error message with there are no X* files. What > >> is the way around that? > > > I think that's normal. > > OK. With test54 removed, I've run several tests and they > each produced an `ALL DONE'. Apparently that means > everything worked? Or that nothing was tested :-). > Here are the tests I ran: > > make -f Make_dos_sh.mak nongui > make -f Make_dos_sh.mak small > make -f Make_dos_sh.mak gui > make -f Make_dos_sh.mak win32 > > The second test isn't much of a test :-) -- Never go to the toilet in a paperless office. /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
