From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 09:29:20 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/5] support/testing: core testing infrastructure In-Reply-To: References: <1486467363-19881-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1486467363-19881-2-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20170208110556.6a3ed63a@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20170305092920.45b60f02@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 19:12:44 +0100, Luca Ceresoli wrote: > I'm no pythonist at all, so I don't know any of the mentioned > infrastructures. But one thing I dislike in the current implementation > is the unpleasant way failures are reported. Are you talking about: * Failures because there is a syntax error in the test script * Failures of the test itself, because the generated Buildroot system doesn't behave as expected To be honest, I don't think the unittest stuff is bringing us that much stuff, so we could just as well roll our own "test runner", giving us more freedom in our errors are handled and reported. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com