[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xnee-devel] [Fwd: Re: [sr #103871] Verifying GUI-Testresults with x
From: |
Henrik Sandklef |
Subject: |
Re: [Xnee-devel] [Fwd: Re: [sr #103871] Verifying GUI-Testresults with xnee using the Tool "xgrabsc"] |
Date: |
Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:30:55 +0100 |
> > -------- Forwarded Message --------
> > From: Veijo Ryhänen <address@hidden>
> > To: Henrik Sandklef <address@hidden>
> > Cc: Dirk Kaplick <address@hidden>, Henrik Sandklef
> > <address@hidden>
> > Subject: Re: [sr #103871] Verifying GUI-Testresults with xnee using
> > the Tool "xgrabsc"
> > Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:01:19 +0200
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am wondering why ImageMagic import screen capture program works
> > almost three times more slowly than xwd ? I checked both .xwd files
> > with xwud -command and I did not find any visible difference between
> > them.
> > (For details, see the end of my message)
If xwd is faster, we'll use that :)
> > How are you planning to calculate checksum ? My choice was adler32
> > instead of md5sum
> > when I did java -program, because Adler32 was much, much more faster
> > than md5sum.
I really think checksum should be calculated after the session is
recorded/replayed....
By doing so the time it takes to calculate the checksum is not important. Of
course, I assume that the checksum isn't used to take some kind of decision
during replay (e.g stop the replaying since the pics differ).
/hesa