On 21.02.19 18:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 21/02/19 10:48, Stefan Raspl wrote: >> Plus this is quite cheap, while a proper solution would require to modify >> the kernels, so we can e.g. pass in a counter for the testcase number. Plus >> we would probably have to come up with reasonable testcase names, while >> this approach simply derives them from each test output. > > I agree. However, you can still do the output per-testcase and just > emit the "plan" (1..$n) as the last line in the TAP file. This would be > the best of both worlds. Yeah, that would be nice. Took a stab at it, but realized this might not be so easy: Since testcases can be executed in parallel, we'd have to implement some kind of locking of the testcase counter. In bash. I couldn't find any way to implement that. Any guidance...? Ciao, Stefan
