<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8"> <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.26.0"> </HEAD> <BODY> On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 13:56 -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> On 2010-04-13 13:46, Gaetan Nadon wrote: > Have you had a look at Automake Test Suite support? (I haven't yet) > <A HREF="http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/automake.html#index-g_t_0040code_007bmkdir-_002dp_007d_002c-macro-check-325">http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/automake.html#index-g_t_0040code_007bmkdir-_002dp_007d_002c-macro-check-325</A> > > It looks like there could be some benefits from the pre-defined "check" > primary variable prefix. Do you mean: dist_check_SCRIPTS = test/runtest TESTS = $(dist_check_SCRIPTS) You still need two lines, one to run the test and one to dist the script. I think TESTS and EXTRA_DIST is a slightly better combination, only because EXTRA_DIST may be used for other files in the future. Otherwise I see no difference. </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> I didn't mean anything specific, just pointing out that automake had some thoughts about adding test cases and perhaps there was something in there to leverage out, you know, the usual about not reinventing the wheel. It looks like you already had a look into it. <BR> <BR> Reviewed-by: Gaetan Nadon <<A HREF="mailto:Gaetan%20Nadon%20%3cmemsize@videotron.ca%3e">memsize@videotron.ca</A>><BR> <BR> Thanks <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> Yaakov Cygwin/X _______________________________________________ <A HREF="mailto:xorg-devel@lists.x.org">xorg-devel@lists.x.org</A>: X.Org development Archives: <A HREF="http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel">http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel</A> Info: <A HREF="http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel">http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel</A> </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> </BODY> </HTML>