Thanks Frank and Eric for the prompt replies! > Autoconf includes the 'autotest' language, which parses a new file > tests.at to build up a (shell script) testsuite; as well as > documentation for a couple of hooks to add in configure.ac and your > Makefile to run such a testsuite. Such tests need not be C programs - > they are anything that you can drive via shell snippets. In fact, > autoconf's own testsuite is written in the autotest language. But I'm > not sure if this is what you had in mind. > http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#Using-Autotest I had seen that but got afraid using it because of the warning 'This section describes a feature which is still**stabilizing.' Since the shell script already exists, I am not sure that would be my best option either... ** > Meanwhile, Automake has support for building up a testsuite based on > various input files, maybe it's easier to use? > http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/automake.html#Tests Yes, Frank pointed me to that and I was just having a look... Thanks, I think this is what I am looking for. I am still trying to figure out which 'Makefile.am' needs this and trying to find more example.... (I have 2 suites of tests to make in 2 different directories under 'test', and each of those directories is further decomposed into 4 subdirectories - would I need one Makefile.am in each subdirectory or can I make it work from the Makefile.am in the test directory?) > > AC_TRY_RUN is for determining a platform characteristic at configure > time, not for running a testsuite at make time. I think you're > confusing the issue, and don't need AC_TRY_RUN for a make-time test. > Also, AC_TRY_RUN is an obsolete wrapper around the newer AC_RUN_IFELSE > macro; this macro does not inherently require a C compiler, but runs a > configure-time compile/run/cross-compile-guess based on the current > language being probed in the configure.ac file (which is usually C, but > can be Fortran). Thanks for the explanation. Yes I am confused... :) > Furthermore, if your Makefile already knows how to run your tests, then > your Makefile.in (if you only use autoconf) or Makefile.am (if you also > use automake) can preserve those test rules as-is, and still run those > tests as you have always done as part of make. ohhh, would you mind pointing to a ressource for that?, that may work even better... I use both autoconf and automake.... the makefile I get from using autoconf/automake is however different than the one I (well my colleague) had before... although isn't the point to get away from the 'standard way' of doing this...? Thanks a lot, Cheers, Eve-Marie _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
