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.
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
More information about the Gnupg-devel
mailing list