search for: ounit

Not actually useful, as TESTS defines the tests, and it breaks when oUnit is not available (as it tries to build an oUnit-based unit test). --- mllib/Makefile.am | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/mllib/Makefile.am b/mllib/Makefile.am index 0b43684..e363f27 100644 --- a/mllib/Makefile.am +++ b/mllib/Makefile.am @@ -132,9 +132,6 @@ libdir.ml: Makefile...

Instead of parsing the version, try to look for the OUnit2 module within the oUnit package. Followup of commit 46bc79109bb51cfb656863da3635f1c8da5f6412. --- configure.ac | 15 ++++----------- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index 5ff151b..7a609cb 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -...

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 06:08:24PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > But I guess I have no chance to change the current patch (even adding > a test using asserts, instead of oUnit, for which I still did not get > a reason why a new test using it would be unacceptable), so ... Fewer dependencies make the code easier for others to consume, and that's especially true when (like oUnit) those dependencies add little value. (That's different from dependencies like, sa...

On Friday, 4 August 2017 10:01:28 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > You asked me to reply to some other points (copied from > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00189.html): > > > Sure. OTOH, we already do use oUnit2, so these reasonings were already > > discussed in the past, and (considered we have tests based on oUnit2) > > deemed not a problem. > > I don't think that every past decision should be unchangable. I agree, but there should be reasons to switch back, since we already inve...

OUnit2 has an OUnit (v1) compatibility module. Unfortunately it is rather gravely broken: https://forge.ocamlcore.org/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1392&group_id=162&atid=730 Since there is no new release fixing this, it's easier to switch to using OUnit2 for unit tests. --- .gitignore...

On Wednesday, 19 July 2017 14:21:51 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:57:08PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > Would it be possible to use oUnit too? > > I'm not clear on what benefit oUnit gives us which is worth the extra > dependency it pulls in. I was referring to OUnit2, which we already have an optional dependency for almost all the OCaml tests. -- Pino Toscano

Covert common_utils_tests to use oUnit as testing framework, replacing the hand-made assert in favour of structured unit tests and better error reporting. common_utils_tests is now built only when the oUnit module has been found. --- mllib/Makefile.am | 17 ++++- mllib/common_utils_tests.ml | 155 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++...

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 07:22:58PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > On Monday 11 May 2015 11:11:50 Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > OUnit2 has an OUnit (v1) compatibility module. Unfortunately it > > is rather gravely broken: > > https://forge.ocamlcore.org/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1392&group_id=162&atid=730 > > > > Since there is no new release fixing this, it's easier to switch to > >...

...unit tests. --- configure.ac | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index e0fb481..e360bbb 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -1120,6 +1120,7 @@ AS_IF([test "x$OCAMLC" != "xno"],[ ]) OCAML_PKG_gettext=no +OCAML_PKG_oUnit=no AS_IF([test "x$OCAMLC" != "xno"],[ # Create mllib/common_gettext.ml, gettext functions or stubs. @@ -1128,9 +1129,13 @@ AS_IF([test "x$OCAMLC" != "xno"],[ mkdir -p mllib GUESTFS_CREATE_COMMON_GETTEXT_ML([mllib/common_gettext.ml]) + +...

...CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 02:29:33PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > On Wednesday, 19 July 2017 14:21:51 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:57:08PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > > > Would it be possible to use oUnit too? > > > > > > I'm not clear on what benefit oUnit gives us which is worth the extra > > > dependency it pulls in. > > > > I was referring to OUnit2, which we already have an optional dependency > > for almost all the OCaml tests. > > Sure...

Would it be possible to use oUnit too? -- Pino Toscano

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 03:01:53PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > On Wednesday, 2 August 2017 13:52:06 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > I think you're suggesting this: > > > > let m = PCRE.exec re "ccaaaabb" in > > if PCRE.matches m then ( > > let whole = PCRE.sub m 0 in > > Not really, my suggestion was to have a separate object

You asked me to reply to some other points (copied from https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00189.html): > Sure. OTOH, we already do use oUnit2, so these reasonings were already > discussed in the past, and (considered we have tests based on oUnit2) > deemed not a problem. I don't think that every past decision should be unchangable. > What I still don't understand is why adding a new test based on oUnit2 > would be...

...\ v2v.mli \ vCenter.mli \ + var_expander.mli \ windows.mli \ windows_virtio.mli @@ -106,6 +107,7 @@ SOURCES_ML = \ types.ml \ uefi.ml \ utils.ml \ + var_expander.ml \ python_script.ml \ name_from_disk.ml \ vCenter.ml \ @@ -442,7 +444,7 @@ TESTS += \ endif if HAVE_OCAML_PKG_OUNIT -TESTS += v2v_unit_tests +TESTS += v2v_unit_tests var_expander_tests endif if ENABLE_APPLIANCE @@ -651,7 +653,7 @@ EXTRA_DIST += \ # Unit tests. check_PROGRAMS = if HAVE_OCAML_PKG_OUNIT -check_PROGRAMS += v2v_unit_tests +check_PROGRAMS += v2v_unit_tests var_expander_tests endif v2v_unit_...

On Monday 11 May 2015 11:11:50 Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > OUnit2 has an OUnit (v1) compatibility module. Unfortunately it > is rather gravely broken: > https://forge.ocamlcore.org/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1392&group_id=162&atid=730 > > Since there is no new release fixing this, it's easier to switch to > using OUnit2 for unit te...

...nes wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 02:29:33PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > > On Wednesday, 19 July 2017 14:21:51 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:57:08PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > > > > Would it be possible to use oUnit too? > > > > > > > > I'm not clear on what benefit oUnit gives us which is worth the extra > > > > dependency it pulls in. > > > > > > I was referring to OUnit2, which we already have an optional dependency > > > for almost all th...

Hi All, I’m being a complete newbie on this one but how do I generate the OCaml bindings? I saw an old google post using “configure —enable-bindings=ocaml” but we don’t use configure anymore (I’m building 3.9.1) and if I just do a regular build (optimized) then I don’t see any bindings in my build directory…. Any ideas? JC

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 03:20:56PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > Not actually useful, as TESTS defines the tests, and it breaks when > oUnit is not available (as it tries to build an oUnit-based unit test). > --- > mllib/Makefile.am | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mllib/Makefile.am b/mllib/Makefile.am > index 0b43684..e363f27 100644 > --- a/mllib/Makefile.am > +++ b/mllib/Makefile.am...

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:57:08PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > Would it be possible to use oUnit too? I'm not clear on what benefit oUnit gives us which is worth the extra dependency it pulls in. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-df lists disk usage of guests...

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 02:29:33PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > On Wednesday, 19 July 2017 14:21:51 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:57:08PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: > > > Would it be possible to use oUnit too? > > > > I'm not clear on what benefit oUnit gives us which is worth the extra > > dependency it pulls in. > > I was referring to OUnit2, which we already have an optional dependency > for almost all the OCaml tests. Sure, understood. But what would we lose by...