On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 10:22:27AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 10:09:11 +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 09:51:40AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:58:02 +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> > > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Hrdina <phrdina@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > scripts/check-augeas.sh | 12 ++++++++++++
> > > > scripts/meson.build | 1 +
> > > > src/Makefile.am | 17 -----------------
> > > > src/meson.build | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
> > > > 4 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > > > create mode 100644 scripts/check-augeas.sh
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > @@ -857,3 +860,16 @@ test(
> > > > args: [ check_aclrules_prog.path(), files('remote/remote_protocol.x'), stateful_driver_source_files ],
> > > > env: runutf8,
> > > > )
> > > > +
> > > > +if augparse_prog.found()
> > >
> > > Can't we use foreach on augeas_test_data and invoke the test
> > > individually for each file rather than adding a script which does the
> > > same?
> >
> > Sure we can, I wanted to stay as close as to autotools where
> > check-augeas is a single target. Using foreach would result into having
> > separate target for each file. In general it is most likely better but
> > I was trying to avoid any changes like this with the rewrite and do them
> > as a followup patches to cleanup the build system.
>
> In autotools the loop is in the automake file (yes, still shell),
> while here you put it into a separate script file. I'd argue that
> putting the loop into the meson file (regardless of how many test
> targets it creates) is more equivalent to the original source than this
> way.
>
> Given that you are now changing all the shell helpers to python I'd
> rather see this done in pure meson, than having a python file looper
> intermediate helper.
The change to python is already done. But I don't care so I can redo it.
Pavel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
