[lldb-dev] Current state of the unit tests

[Pavel Labath via lldb-dev]

Yeah, if a lit test fails, the dotest tests will not get run. That is
fine, but having a target which only runs dotest tests would probably
be nice as well.

On 23 February 2018 at 16:15, Vedant Kumar <vsk at apple.com> wrote:
> check-lldb-lit should just be a dependency of check-lldb, so the dotest.py
> tests should still run.
>
> Are one of the lit tests failing? That might explain why subsequent tests
> aren't run.
>
> vedant
>
> On Feb 23, 2018, at 4:13 PM, Adrian McCarthy <amccarth at google.com> wrote:
>
> As of this afternoon, it seems ninja check-lldb runs only the lit tests and
> not the dotest.py tests.  Was this an intentional change?
>
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Vedant Kumar via lldb-dev
> <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> Cool, I'll work up a patch for this.
>>
>> And thanks for commenting on PR36494, I'm testing a fix out right now :).
>>
>> vedant
>>
>> On Feb 23, 2018, at 3:35 PM, Pavel Labath <labath at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 23 February 2018 at 15:17, Vedant Kumar <vsk at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>> Second, TestClient::SendMessage is generating quite a lot of "INFO" output
>> which clutters up the terminal. Pavel, would you mind if I removed this
>> logging?
>>
>>
>> Yeah, we should probably do that. The idea here was that the packet
>> log would provide you with additional context for the situation when
>> the test fails, but it *is* very verbose. I'll have to come up with a
>> better solution for error reporting here.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lldb-dev mailing list
>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>>
>
>