"warning no tests to run"

John Arbash Meinel john at arbash-meinel.com
Thu Aug 29 10:09:14 UTC 2013


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2013-08-29 14:02, Gavin Panella wrote:
> On 29 August 2013 09:25, roger peppe <roger.peppe at canonical.com>
> wrote:
>> It seems to me that gwacl should have made sure (as usual) that a
>> test fails before making it pass.
> 
> I'm the culprit. However, I have an excuse. This was originally 
> developed as /logging.go, and was moved into a subpackage in rev 
> 90.2.27. I assumed the tests would continue to run, and - tada -
> there were no failures, so I moved on.
> 
> For me there would have been value in having `go test` draw
> attention to missing tests in the ./... case. I didn't do
> everything I possibly could to ensure that the tests were still
> being exercised, but I also don't feel like I was negligent.
> 
> It's hard to keep everyone happy!
> 

Note that it doesn't help that your "make check" target runs into a
different "go test" bug.

Namely, "go test -gocheck.v ./..." doesn't *actually* run the tests in
any subdirectories.

The specific problem is how the arguments get evaluated, but we don't
have any workarounds for it that I know of. (You just don't pass
- -gocheck.v to ./... is the only workaround I have.)

So even if there was a Test function, it still wouldn't have failed
any tests because "make check" doesn't run them.

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlIfHcoACgkQJdeBCYSNAAOQPgCfVKK22GrtDbJYzxiePrxA3Y54
isoAn0s1h/nOomN3K2RNF6hzNxofoa+6
=cabJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Juju-dev mailing list