A new test framework: request for comments and testing

Werner Koch wk at gnupg.org
Wed May 4 20:02:31 CEST 2016

On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 17:13, justus at g10code.com said:

> * it is completely self-contained, doesn't rely on e.g. cmp

FWIW, while preparing 2.1.12 I had to remove your migrations test cases
because there were problems with missing files after "make distcheck"
and at least two portability problems:

  - mktemp is not portable; it is even not Posix.

  - basename(1) is not availabale on older Unices while gcc can be used
    there to have limited to support for C-99.  BTW, instead of using
    "basename $x .asc" it is easier to use "${x%.asc}".

Thus gpgscm will actually make it easier to write portable code.

> Please accept my apologies for not communicating earlier what I was
> doing and where we want to go.  We plan to merge this after the 2.1.12
> release.

Release done; now is the time to let McCarthy test our code.



Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list