New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add basic integration tests for travis #2764

Merged
merged 6 commits into from May 17, 2018

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@phansch
Collaborator

phansch commented May 16, 2018

This adds an integration test setup very similar to the one used by rustfmt.

The goal of this PR is to get it working for just cargo and rand and once this is merged, we can add the rest easily. I also want to make it work for AppVeyor in this PR.

I expect this to fail currently, mainly due to cargo, let's see!

cc #2736

phansch added some commits May 16, 2018

@oli-obk

This comment has been minimized.

Collaborator

oli-obk commented May 16, 2018

looks like the script doesn't have the execute bit set

phansch added some commits May 16, 2018

No -e in integration_tests
Because that makes the script stop early and not print any clippy error
output.
@phansch

This comment has been minimized.

Collaborator

phansch commented May 16, 2018

Ok, the build script now works as expected and cargo as well as rand are failing. I will add the same for the AppVeyor build next.

@oli-obk

This comment has been minimized.

Collaborator

oli-obk commented May 17, 2018

Feel free to merge this and continue development on a new PR. No need to do everything at once

@phansch phansch changed the title from [wip] Add integration tests to Add basic integration tests for travis May 17, 2018

@phansch phansch merged commit f19eab9 into rust-lang:master May 17, 2018

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

@phansch phansch deleted the phansch:integration_tests branch May 17, 2018

@matthiaskrgr

This comment has been minimized.

Collaborator

matthiaskrgr commented on dd0ed5d Jul 28, 2018

This leaves the 2 branches of the check() function identical which is confusing me a bit, is this something that can be cleaned up?

@phansch

This comment has been minimized.

Collaborator

phansch commented Jul 29, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment