On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 20:12:55 +0200, Thomas Jost <schnouki@schnouki.net> wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:28:38 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote: > Non-text part: multipart/signed > > On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 17:37:35 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 14:36:36 +0200, Thomas Jost <schnouki@schnouki.net> wrote: > > > > Before this change, the test suite reported many failed tests on machines where > > > > screen is not installed (which is the case of many *BSD systems). This patch > > > > makes the test suite try to use tmux, another terminal multiplexer, if screen is > > > > not available. > > > > > > This is a nice improvement. But I think we should make it even better :) > > > There are more terminal emulators besides screen and tmux (dtach comes > > > to mind). We need a more general mechanism for trying them. There > > > should be a list of commands for running terminal emulators in the order > > > of preference (I think that is dtach, tmux, screen), and we should try > > > each one in a loop (this would also avoid repeating the long emacs > > > command). > > > > Hi, guys. I suppose you can go down this route if you want, but I worry > > that it just adds a lot of extra code to the test suite that will > > ultimately make it less robust. What's wrong with just depending on > > screen for the tests? I'm sure screen is available on every operating > > system that we currently support. > > > > It makes me wary that we would be starting a precedent for making a > > bunch of conditionals for all of the possible alternative tools we use > > in the test suite. Maybe that's an overblown concern, though. > > > > jamie. > > You're right, just depending on screen would be enough (the package is > just 864 kB on Arch Linux...), and supporting alternative tools > would make the test suite more complicated and less robust. But the > dependency on screen should be more *explicit*: if it's not available, > the test suite should skip all the emacs tests and display a message > about screen. > > Apparently test-lib.sh includes some things about prerequisites. I'll > try to use these to implement the explicit dependency on screen. > Full ack. The only reason I did not implement it in the original patch is because there is an existing patch series [1] that adds proper prerequisites for gdb, emacs and gpg. So instead of reimplementing the same thing, I decided to wait until that series is merged and add screen prerequisite later. Regards, Dmitry [1] id:"1307016220-17509-1-git-send-email-pieter@praet.org" > Regards, > > -- > Thomas/Schnouki Non-text part: application/pgp-signature