From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: convert libpq uri-regress tests to tap test |
Date: | 2022-02-23 23:21:36 |
Message-ID: | 4f4c04c2-f23c-6668-1b24-224fc6478bfd@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 23.02.22 23:58, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> On 23.02.22 21:30, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> Where would we want that test to live? Right now we have the slightly odd
>>> convention that some tap tests live in src/test/{misc,modules,...}. But
>>> e.g. frontend binary ones are below src/bin/.
>
>> libpq TAP tests should be in src/interfaces/libpq/t/.
>
>> I think there were issues that the build farm wouldn't pick up a test
>> located there, but that should be fixed rather than worked around.
>
> That's failing to account for the fact that a libpq test can't
> really be a pure-perl TAP test; you need some C code to drive the
> library. I don't agree with intermixing such code with libpq
> itself, independently of any buildsystem issues (which there
> might well be).
Such things could be put under src/interfaces/libpq/test, or some other
subdirectory. We already have src/interfaces/ecpg/test.
> So I think the design of putting such tests under
> src/modules is fine.
I don't get what the rationale for that would be. libpq tests are not
"modules" of any kind.
If I'm working on libpq, I want to do make && make check inside the
libpq source directory.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2022-02-24 00:15:40 | [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers |
Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2022-02-23 23:20:52 | Re: [PATCH] Enable SSL library detection via PQsslAttribute |