On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 04:50:26PM -0800, Josh Steadmon wrote: > This has the additional benefit that test harnesses seeking to run all > unit tests can find them with a simple glob of "t/unit-tests/bin/t-*", > with no exceptions needed. This will be important in a later patch where > we add support for running the unit tests via a test-tool subcommand. Is this last paragraph still accurate? I think in this rebased version of the series, we'll continue to use $(UNIT_TESTS) derived from the source list rather than a glob in bin/. > --- a/t/Makefile > +++ b/t/Makefile > @@ -44,8 +44,7 @@ TINTEROP = $(sort $(wildcard interop/i[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh)) > CHAINLINTTESTS = $(sort $(patsubst chainlint/%.test,%,$(wildcard chainlint/*.test))) > CHAINLINT = '$(PERL_PATH_SQ)' chainlint.pl > UNIT_TEST_SOURCES = $(wildcard unit-tests/t-*.c) > -UNIT_TEST_PROGRAMS = $(patsubst unit-tests/%.c,unit-tests/bin/%$(X),$(UNIT_TEST_SOURCES)) > -UNIT_TESTS = $(sort $(filter-out unit-tests/bin/t-basic%,$(UNIT_TEST_PROGRAMS))) > +UNIT_TESTS = $(patsubst unit-tests/%.c,unit-tests/bin/%$(X),$(UNIT_TEST_SOURCES)) This drops the intermediate UNIT_TEST_PROGRAMS, which makes sense. It was only used to keep the long lines a bit more readable. But it also drops the $(sort) call. Do we need to keep it? Certainly I'd think we want the contents of $(UNIT_TESTS) to be in a deterministic order. Does the $(wildcard) function already return things in sorted order? I can't find any mention in the documention. It seems to do so for me in a simple test, but aae5239be2 (t/Makefile: Use $(sort ...) explicitly where needed, 2011-09-04) argues otherwise. So I think we probably want to keep it (or possibly move it onto the UNIT_TEST_SOURCES line, which keeps it close to the wildcard call). -Peff
