Skip to content
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 self-check make target #835

Closed
alerque opened this issue Feb 21, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #904
Closed

Add self-check make target #835

alerque opened this issue Feb 21, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #904
Assignees
Labels
todo tooling Build tooling, release management, and packaging processes
Milestone

Comments

@alerque
Copy link
Member

alerque commented Feb 21, 2020

We need a "light" version of make test that doesn't run full regressions tests but does do some kind of internal self-check to make sure we can parse input and generate output. Right now we are in various places either recommend people compile the manual (huge time waster plus requires fonts, etc.), the examples (confusing to get to, also slow), the full regression tests (require fonts, slow), or just check --version (it turns out that doesn't validate libtexpdf is even working). I'm using make busted for the Arch Linux packaging, but that adds dependencies.

A light self check that just makes sure the cogs are turning would be nice to give as a tool to distro packagers.

@alerque alerque added todo tooling Build tooling, release management, and packaging processes labels Feb 21, 2020
@alerque alerque added this to the v0.10.4 milestone Feb 21, 2020
@alerque alerque self-assigned this Feb 21, 2020
@simoncozens
Copy link
Member

This is what examples/simple.sil is designed for. Can we just add a .expected for that?

@alerque
Copy link
Member Author

alerque commented Feb 21, 2020

No because we don't want to test the debug backend output, we want to test the pdf output. Even sile -o test.pdf <<< "<sile></sile>" would be enough I think, we just want to know it runs without errors. I just need to try a few failure cases I've run into lately.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
todo tooling Build tooling, release management, and packaging processes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants