harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexander Kleymenov" <kleyme...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] new dependency (was: Re: [testing][crash handling] it will nice to add *any* crash handling to build system)
Date Mon, 18 Dec 2006 03:40:00 GMT

Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
> On 12/15/06, Alexander Kleymenov <kleymenov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Guys,
> >
> > please, don't forget that JVM  can crash before creating of empty xml
> > file.
> In this case any start of vm should leads to crash. It will be easy to
> reproduce.

I can't agree with you. While working on regression tests I saw the
situations when the same VM crashed on one test and successfully passed
on another.
This issue of an approach can lead to serious problems to be unnoticed.
So I conclude it can't be used for DRLVM testing.

> > And what about the tests not using xml formatter?
> I think, we can generate xml-files by build as post-processing of test run.
>  thanks, Vladimir

Now I see this approach is loosing its main feature - simplicity. It's
starting to look as a set of workarounds for more and more arising problems.
While other proposed approach based on task extending looks quite natural
and simple [1]. By using of standard Ant's means (with available
well-documented API) it allows to implement all the things we need for
JVM testing: crash handling, std/err test output collection, and crash
I use it for DRLVM regression testing and it works well. However, there is an
opinion that JVM crash-handling means should be common for each task we do.

So let's decide on approach to choose for further use.


[1]  http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2416

View raw message