You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to log4cxx-dev@logging.apache.org by Bob Rossi <bo...@cox.net> on 2006/12/15 15:33:45 UTC
testsuite
Does log4cxx have a testsuite that I can run? If so, how?
Thanks,
Bob Rossi
Re: testsuite
Posted by Bob Rossi <bo...@cox.net>.
On Sat, Dec 16, 2006 at 09:48:35AM -0600, Curt Arnold wrote:
> I can take your patches from here, but it will be tomorrow or early
> next week before I get a chance to do it.
>
> I'm glad you were able to get the build going. Maybe you can help me
> as I've been a bit stumped on how to set up a MinGW build environment
> since they split it into so many pieces (MSYS, etc) and I haven't
> found the MinGW site all that helpful. I've just stayed back with
> the old all-in-one MinGW-3.1.0 and LOGCXX-116 might just be a
> compiler bug with that specific version of gcc.
Sure, I can help, I've got it all automated. Let me know when you are
interested. As for the patches, I was interestd in having them in for
the next release. Hope that's possible.
Bob Rossi
Re: testsuite
Posted by Bob Rossi <bo...@cox.net>.
On Sat, Dec 16, 2006 at 09:48:35AM -0600, Curt Arnold wrote:
> I can take your patches from here, but it will be tomorrow or early
> next week before I get a chance to do it.
>
> I'm glad you were able to get the build going. Maybe you can help me
> as I've been a bit stumped on how to set up a MinGW build environment
> since they split it into so many pieces (MSYS, etc) and I haven't
> found the MinGW site all that helpful. I've just stayed back with
> the old all-in-one MinGW-3.1.0 and LOGCXX-116 might just be a
> compiler bug with that specific version of gcc.
Ping.
Bob Rossi
Re: testsuite
Posted by Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org>.
I can take your patches from here, but it will be tomorrow or early
next week before I get a chance to do it.
I'm glad you were able to get the build going. Maybe you can help me
as I've been a bit stumped on how to set up a MinGW build environment
since they split it into so many pieces (MSYS, etc) and I haven't
found the MinGW site all that helpful. I've just stayed back with
the old all-in-one MinGW-3.1.0 and LOGCXX-116 might just be a
compiler bug with that specific version of gcc.
Re: testsuite
Posted by Bob Rossi <bo...@cox.net>.
On Sat, Dec 16, 2006 at 12:20:50AM -0600, Curt Arnold wrote:
>
> On Dec 15, 2006, at 1:07 PM, Bob Rossi wrote:
>
> >Attached is a patch that correctly allows the autotools to find the
> >cppunit installation when it is installed in a non standard place.
> >
> >BTW, is this list active? Is log4cxx active? It would be great if
> >someone could tell me they are at least noticing the diffs I've
> >sent in,
> >even if they can't get to them for a while.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Bob Rossi
> >
>
>
> It is better to use JIRA to record patches (http://issues.apache.org/
> jira. It makes things easier on the developers since all code
> changes should be associated with JIRA issues and patches are much
> more likely to be noticed during bug killing sprees if they are in
> JIRA instead of depending on the developers to go back through the
> mailing list to find issues there.
>
> The following two issues address MinGW related issues with log4cxx:
>
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOGCXX-74
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOGCXX-116
>
> BTW: It is also good to use separate posts for separate topics since
> it make it easier to follow topics in the archives. As for the
> "active" part, the log4cxx-dev list is archived at several places
> (see http://logging.apache.org/site/mailing-lists.html) which makes
> it fairly easy to check the activity of the list yourself plus you
> are getting fairly timely responses when you ask a question.
OK, well, should I submit both of the patches I made to JIRA? BTW, I was
able to get past both of those problems comiling log4cxx with mingw. I
have successfully made a build, and ran the testsuite.
Bob Rossi
Re: testsuite
Posted by Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org>.
On Dec 15, 2006, at 1:07 PM, Bob Rossi wrote:
> Attached is a patch that correctly allows the autotools to find the
> cppunit installation when it is installed in a non standard place.
>
> BTW, is this list active? Is log4cxx active? It would be great if
> someone could tell me they are at least noticing the diffs I've
> sent in,
> even if they can't get to them for a while.
>
> Thanks,
> Bob Rossi
>
It is better to use JIRA to record patches (http://issues.apache.org/
jira. It makes things easier on the developers since all code
changes should be associated with JIRA issues and patches are much
more likely to be noticed during bug killing sprees if they are in
JIRA instead of depending on the developers to go back through the
mailing list to find issues there.
The following two issues address MinGW related issues with log4cxx:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOGCXX-74
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOGCXX-116
BTW: It is also good to use separate posts for separate topics since
it make it easier to follow topics in the archives. As for the
"active" part, the log4cxx-dev list is archived at several places
(see http://logging.apache.org/site/mailing-lists.html) which makes
it fairly easy to check the activity of the list yourself plus you
are getting fairly timely responses when you ask a question.
Re: testsuite
Posted by Bob Rossi <bo...@cox.net>.
Attached is a patch that correctly allows the autotools to find the
cppunit installation when it is installed in a non standard place.
BTW, is this list active? Is log4cxx active? It would be great if
someone could tell me they are at least noticing the diffs I've sent in,
even if they can't get to them for a while.
Thanks,
Bob Rossi
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 12:11:42PM -0500, Bob Rossi wrote:
> Yes, 'make check' doesn't work. Anyone have any idea on how hard that
> would be to implement? I really don't want to install ant.
>
> What's the command that ant run-unittest kicks off?
>
> Thanks,
> Bob Rossi
>
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 11:23:45AM -0500, Bob Rossi wrote:
> > I see. I don't have cppunit installed. This would be a good start I'm
> > sure. I'll let you know how this works out, thanks.
> >
> > Bob Rossi
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 10:17:30AM -0600, Curt Arnold wrote:
> > > Yes, log4cxx has an CPPUNIT based set of unit tests that roughly
> > > correspond to log4j's JUnit unit tests. They are run from the Ant
> > > build by:
> > >
> > > ant run-unittest
> > >
> > > The build instructions in INSTALL suggest that "make check" would do
> > > the same thing for the autotools build, but I'm not sure that that
> > > has been implemented.
> > >
> > > On Dec 15, 2006, at 8:33 AM, Bob Rossi wrote:
> > >
> > > >Does log4cxx have a testsuite that I can run? If so, how?
> > > >
> > > >Thanks,
> > > >Bob Rossi
> > >
Re: testsuite
Posted by Bob Rossi <bo...@cox.net>.
Yes, 'make check' doesn't work. Anyone have any idea on how hard that
would be to implement? I really don't want to install ant.
What's the command that ant run-unittest kicks off?
Thanks,
Bob Rossi
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 11:23:45AM -0500, Bob Rossi wrote:
> I see. I don't have cppunit installed. This would be a good start I'm
> sure. I'll let you know how this works out, thanks.
>
> Bob Rossi
>
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 10:17:30AM -0600, Curt Arnold wrote:
> > Yes, log4cxx has an CPPUNIT based set of unit tests that roughly
> > correspond to log4j's JUnit unit tests. They are run from the Ant
> > build by:
> >
> > ant run-unittest
> >
> > The build instructions in INSTALL suggest that "make check" would do
> > the same thing for the autotools build, but I'm not sure that that
> > has been implemented.
> >
> > On Dec 15, 2006, at 8:33 AM, Bob Rossi wrote:
> >
> > >Does log4cxx have a testsuite that I can run? If so, how?
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >Bob Rossi
> >
Re: testsuite
Posted by Bob Rossi <bo...@cox.net>.
I see. I don't have cppunit installed. This would be a good start I'm
sure. I'll let you know how this works out, thanks.
Bob Rossi
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 10:17:30AM -0600, Curt Arnold wrote:
> Yes, log4cxx has an CPPUNIT based set of unit tests that roughly
> correspond to log4j's JUnit unit tests. They are run from the Ant
> build by:
>
> ant run-unittest
>
> The build instructions in INSTALL suggest that "make check" would do
> the same thing for the autotools build, but I'm not sure that that
> has been implemented.
>
> On Dec 15, 2006, at 8:33 AM, Bob Rossi wrote:
>
> >Does log4cxx have a testsuite that I can run? If so, how?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Bob Rossi
>
Re: testsuite
Posted by Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org>.
Yes, log4cxx has an CPPUNIT based set of unit tests that roughly
correspond to log4j's JUnit unit tests. They are run from the Ant
build by:
ant run-unittest
The build instructions in INSTALL suggest that "make check" would do
the same thing for the autotools build, but I'm not sure that that
has been implemented.
On Dec 15, 2006, at 8:33 AM, Bob Rossi wrote:
> Does log4cxx have a testsuite that I can run? If so, how?
>
> Thanks,
> Bob Rossi