Re: lib/45143 (add -f to atf-run(1))

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

The following reply was made to PR lib/45143; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Julio Merino <jmmv%julipedia.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>, 
jruohonen%iki.fi@localhost
Subject: Re: lib/45143 (add -f to atf-run(1))
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 08:45:15 -0400

 On 8/14/11 11:00 PM, David Holland wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR lib/45143; it has been noted by GNATS.
 >
 > From: David Holland<dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > Cc:
 > Subject: Re: lib/45143 (add -f to atf-run(1))
 > Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 02:56:45 +0000
 >
 >   On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 11:25:01PM +0000, Julio Merino wrote:
 >    >   This sounds interesting.  Could you provide a specific use case 
 > please?
 >    >    Is this only for debugging purposes?
 >
 >   If you have tests that are skipped because they don't work, the
 >   necessary first step toward making them start working is to run them
 >   anyway and see what happens.
 
 Uh... of course.  But if you are already attempting to debug a failing 
 test case, it's equally easy for you to edit the code and remove what 
 you think is faulty.  Using a "force flag" in this scenario provides 
 zero value.
 
 And, "are skipped because they don't work" ?  Can you provide an example 
 of that?  What kind of "don't work" are you referring to?