Re: Running tests with different path for Kyuafiles and binaries ?

[Julio Merino <jmmv%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Emmanuel Fleury <fleury%labri.fr@localhost> 
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 06/08/2012 04:34 PM, Julio Merino wrote:
>>
>>
>>  Or should there be an
>> additional "binary" attribute to the test program that can be a path,
>> and "name" is just the identifier?  How are these represented for
>> historical purposes in the database?
>
>
> I do not get the problem here. You just want to distinguish the location of
> the two rootdirs, nothing more.

Correct, if that's the only thing you want to permit.  But allowing
*arbitrary* paths in the atf_test_program definitions would be
non-trivial and have some other nasty side-effects in the current
design.

>> Another possibility that just crossed my mind (and that I think makes
>> a lot of sense atually) would be to teach "kyua test" about build
>> directories: allow the caller to specify a destdir/buildroot and use
>> that as the prefix to locate the binaries themselves (not the
>> Kyuafiles).  This would be more in line with make's behavior and some
>> other build tools I have used.  The issue here would be dealing with
>> programs that reference data files in the program's srcdir: if the
>> data file needs some kind of "build", then it will be in the
>> buildroot; otherwise, it will be in the source tree.  But we could
>> deal with that somehow!
>
>
> Yes, this is what I would go for. :)

Filed http://code.google.com/p/kyua/issues/detail?id=32 .  It sounds
very useful (particularly to kill some ugly chunks of code!), so I'll
try to do this for 0.5.

-- 
Julio Merino / @jmmv