xref: /openbsd/gnu/usr.bin/cvs/TESTS (revision 09467b48)
1To run the tests:
2
3	$ make check
4
5Note that if your /bin/sh doesn't support shell functions, you'll
6have to try something like this, where "/bin/sh5" is replaced by the
7pathname of a shell which handles normal shell functions:
8
9	$ make SHELL=/bin/sh5 check
10
11Also note that you must be logged in as a regular user, not root.
12
13WARNING:  This test can take quite a while to run, esp. if your
14disks are slow or over-loaded.
15
16The tests work in /tmp/cvs-sanity (which the tests create) by default.
17If for some reason you want them to work in a different directory, you
18can set the TESTDIR environment variable to the desired location
19before running them.
20
21The tests use a number of tools (awk, expr, id, tr, etc.) that are not
22required for running CVS itself.  In most cases, the standard vendor-
23supplied versions of these tools work just fine, but there are some
24exceptions -- expr in particular is heavily used and many vendor
25versions are deficient in one way or another.  Note that some vendors
26provide multiple versions of tools (typically an ancient, traditional
27version and a new, standards-conforming version), so you may already
28have a usable version even if the default version isn't.  If you don't
29have a suitable tool, you can probably get one from the GNU Project (see
30http://www.gnu.org).  expr and id are both part of the GNU shellutils
31package, tr is part of the GNU textutils package, and awk is part of the
32GNU gawk package.  The test script tries to verify that the tools exist
33and are usable; if not, it tries to find the GNU versions and use them
34instead.  If it can't find the GNU versions either, it will print an
35error message and, depending on the severity of the deficiency, it may
36exit.
37
38If there is some unexpected output, that is a failure which can be
39somewhat hard to track down.  Finding out which test is producing the
40output is not always easy.  The newer tests (that is, ones using
41dotest*) will not have this problem, but there are many old tests
42which have not been converted.
43
44If running the tests produces the output "FAIL:" followed by the name
45of the test that failed, then the details on the failure are in the
46file check.log.  If it says "exit status is " followed by a number,
47then the exit status of the command under test was not what the test
48expected.  If it says "** expected:" followed by a regular expression
49followed by "** got:" followed by some text, then the regular
50expression is the output which the test expected, and the text is the
51output which the command under test actually produced.  In some cases
52you'll have to look closely to see how they differ.
53
54If output from "make remotecheck" is out of order compared to what is
55expected (for example,
56
57   a
58   b
59   cvs foo: this is a demo
60
61is expected and
62
63   a
64   cvs foo: this is a demo
65   b
66
67is output), this is probably a well-known bug in the CVS server
68(search for "out-of-order" in src/server.c for a comment explaining
69the cause).  It is a real pain in running the testsuite, but if you
70are lucky and/or your machine is fast and/or lightly loaded, you won't
71run into it.  Running the tests again might succeed if the first run
72failed in this manner.
73
74For more information on what goes in check.log, and how the tests are
75run in general, you'll have to read sanity.sh.  Depending on just what
76you are looking for, and how familiar you are with the Bourne shell
77and regular expressions, it will range from relatively straightforward
78to obscure.
79
80If you choose to submit a bug report based on tests failing, be
81aware that, as with all bug reports, you may or may not get a
82response, and your odds might be better if you include enough
83information to reproduce the bug, an analysis of what is going
84wrong (if you have the time to provide one), etc.  The check.log
85file is the first place to look.
86
87ABOUT STDOUT AND STDERR
88***********************
89
90The sanity.sh test framework combines stdout and stderr and for tests
91to pass requires that output appear in the given order.  Some people
92suggest that ordering between stdout and stderr should not be
93required, or to put it another way, that the out-of-order bug referred
94to above, and similar behaviors, should be considered features, or at
95least tolerable.  The reasoning behind the current behavior is that
96having the output appear in a certain order is the correct behavior
97for users using CVS interactively--that users get confused if the
98order is unpredictable.
99
100ABOUT TEST FRAMEWORKS
101*********************
102
103People periodically suggest using dejagnu or some other test
104framework.  A quick look at sanity.sh should make it clear that there
105are indeed reasons to be dissatisfied with the status quo.  Ideally a
106replacement framework would achieve the following:
107
1081.  Widely portable, including to a wide variety of unices, NT, Win95,
109OS/2, VMS, probably DOS and Win3, etc.
110
1112.  Nicely match extended regular expressions of unlimited length.
112
1133.  Be freely redistributable, and if possible already the kind of
114thing people might have already installed.  The harder it is to get
115and install the framework, the less people will run the tests.
116
117The various contenders are:
118
119* Bourne shell and GNU expr (the status quo).  Falls short on #1
120(we've only tried unix and NT, although MKS might help with other DOS
121mutants).  #3 is pretty good (the main dependency is GNU expr which is
122fairly widely available).
123
124* Bourne shell with a new regexp matcher we would distribute with
125CVS.  This means maintaining a regexp matcher and the makefiles which
126go with it.  Not clearly a win over Bourne shell and GNU expr.
127
128* Bourne shell, and use sed to remove variable portions of output, and
129thus produce a form that can be compared with cmp or diff (this
130sidesteps the need for a full regular expression matcher as mentioned
131in #2 above).  The C News tests are said to work this way.  This would
132appear to rely on variable portions of output having a certain syntax
133and might spuriously recognize them out of context (this issue needs
134more investigation; it isn't clear how big a problem it is in
135practice).  Same portability issues as the other choices based on the
136Bourne shell.
137
138* Dejagnu.  This is overkill; most of dejagnu is either unnecessary
139(e.g. libraries for communicating with target boards) or undesirable
140(e.g. the code which stats every file in sight to find the tests).  On
141the plus side, dejagnu is probably closer than any of the other
142choices to having everything which is needed already there.
143
144* Write our own small framework directly in tcl and distribute with
145CVS.  The tests would look much like dejagnu tests, but we'd avoid the
146unnecessary baggage.  The only dependency would be on tcl (that is,
147wish).
148
149* perl or python or <any other serious contenders here?>
150
151It is worth thinking about how to:
152
153a.  include spaces in arguments which we pass to the program under
154test (sanity.sh dotest cannot do this; see test rcs-9 for a
155workaround).
156
157b.  pass stdin to the program under test (sanity.sh, again, handles
158this by bypassing dotest).
159
160c.  have a send-expect type dialog with the program under test
161    (e.g. see server-7 or pserver-4 which want to talk the CVS
162    protocol, or the many tests which need to answer the prompt of "cvs
163    release", e.g. deep-5).
164