[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#15933: make check not working
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#15933: make check not working |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Nov 2013 23:08:25 +0200 |
> From: Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de>
> Cc: andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, 15933@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 20:24:28 +0100
>
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> >> > --[make check]----------------------------------------------
> >> > Indenting module modname...done
> >> > passed 180/521 f90-test-bug8691
> >> > passed 181/521 f90-test-bug8820
> >> > passed 182/521 f90-test-bug9553a
> >> > passed 183/521 f90-test-bug9553b
> >> > passed 184/521 f90-test-bug9690
> >> > passed 185/521 f90-test-indent
> >> > passed 186/521 file-notify-test00-availability
> >> > skipped 187/521 file-notify-test00-availability-remote
> >> > passed 188/521 file-notify-test01-add-watch
> >> > skipped 189/521 file-notify-test01-add-watch-remote
> >> > make[1]: *** [check] Error 5
> >> > make[1]: Leaving directory
> >> > `/c/emacs/src/emacs/trunk/obj-mingw32/test/automated'
> >> Oops. Please indicate in the bug report the environment you were
> >> using. I guess it was MS Windows whatever (which might it make hard for
> >> me to debug, 'cause I don't use it).
> >
> > It might be easy enough to guess why it fails. I see this in
> > file-notify-tests.el:
> >
> > ;; There is no default value on w32 systems, which could work out of the
> > box.
> > (defconst file-notify-test-remote-temporary-file-directory
> > (if (eq system-type 'windows-nt) null-device "/ssh::/tmp")
> > "Temporary directory for Tramp tests.")
>
> No, it did fail in file-notify-test02-events.
How do you know? The fact that it said "skipped" does not necessarily
mean the code that "skipped" didn't error out.
If you do know what triggered the error, can you point it out?
> null-device is an indicator NOT to try remote test cases.
Why not nil?
> "/ssh::/tmp" is indeed for accessing a local sshd. Nothing I would
> assume for MS Windows.
You could provide for a possibility to set this up with a remote Unix
machine. It would be better than just skipping, I think.
- bug#15933: make check not working, (continued)
- bug#15933: make check not working, Andy Moreton, 2013/11/20
- bug#15933: make check not working, Glenn Morris, 2013/11/20
- bug#15933: make check not working, Andy Moreton, 2013/11/20
- bug#15933: make check not working, Michael Albinus, 2013/11/24
- bug#15933: make check not working, Andy Moreton, 2013/11/25
- bug#15933: make check not working, Michael Albinus, 2013/11/25
- bug#15933: make check not working, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/11/25
- bug#15933: make check not working, Michael Albinus, 2013/11/25
- bug#15933: make check not working,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#15933: make check not working, Glenn Morris, 2013/11/25
- bug#15933: make check not working, Michael Albinus, 2013/11/26
- bug#15933: make check not working, Michael Albinus, 2013/11/26
- bug#15933: make check not working, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/11/28
- bug#15933: make check not working, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/11/28
- bug#15933: make check not working, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/11/29
- bug#15933: make check not working, Andy Moreton, 2013/11/29
- bug#15933: make check not working, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/11/29