From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Supporting TAP tests with MSVC and Windows |
Date: | 2015-04-10 02:29:57 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTMmanGhAZC0GME_HyFTSgOqvKYu8rF3uAP6pnL+f0QNA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(Thanks Noah for pointing out that the patch did not reach the MLs..)
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> That's not a complete review, just some highlights.
>
> Thanks again.
Here is a v2 with the following changes:
- Use an environment variable to define where pg_regress is located.
- Use SSPI to access a node in the tests, to secure the test environment.
- Rebase on latest HEAD
- SSL tests are run only if build is configured with openssl
A couple of things to note:
- pg_rewind tests are still disabled, waiting for the outcome of
5519F169(dot)8030406(at)gmx(dot)net(dot) They will need some tweaks.
- SSL tests can work if an equivalent of cp is available, like
something installed with msysgit... IMO the scripts in src/test/ssl
should be patched to be made more portable (see
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqQivFxnSjPwkyapa8=HTGm0hfDNvdGcM3=hkK6fPT0+Pg@mail.gmail.com)
- I tested the scripts with MinGW and this patch and got them working.
As prove can fail because of a bad perl interpreter, pointing to
/usr/bin/perl, it is necessary to enforce "PROVE = c:\Perl64\bin\perl
c:\Perl64\bin\prove" or similar. That's not beautiful, but it works,
and the t/ scripts need no further modifications. At least I checked
that.
Regards,
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Add-support-for-TAP-tests-on-Windows.patch | text/x-patch | 16.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-04-10 04:46:58 | Re: TABLESAMPLE patch |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-04-10 02:29:52 | Re: NOT NULL markings for BKI columns |