Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:12:07PM +0100, OBones wrote:
>
>> Neil Bird wrote:
>>
>>> I couldn't use the version from trunk/1.7 as it differs too
>>> much. I will try to submit the patch for someone's perusal at
>>> some point, but I couldn't properly test is as for some reason my
>>> build of svn out of 1.6.x svn (even before modifying it) fails
>>> 'make check': all the tests pass, but I get a load of XFAIL lines
>>> I don't understand.
>>>
>>> AFAICT, the XFAILs I get after my patch are the same as before,
>>> but it's not the warm PASS feeling I was hoping for.
>>>
>> XFAIL stands for "eXpected to FAIL", meaning that if SVN is doing
>> good, then the test should fail.
>> For instance, you expect svn not to delete an existing file on
>> checkout, so you write your test expecting it to fail the checkout.
>> If it succeeds, the test has not failed as expected.
>>
> That's not quite right. Behaviour like that would be verified
> via a PASS test. The test would FAIL if svn overwrote the file.
>
> XFails are used to flag known bugs or undesirable behaviour which
> cannot be fixed at present (e.g. there are a couple of XFAIL tests
> for tree conflict handling -- we'd like to do better, but can't at the
> moment). Once the bug is fixed, the test will XPASS (unexpected PASS),
> and we switch it to PASS then.
>
>
Ah that makes even more sense this way, thanks for the clarification
Received on 2011-02-02 16:51:34 CET