[Xcb] xcb/test: I propose to base it on cppunit

Eric Anholt eric at anholt.net
Fri Mar 31 20:25:29 UTC 2017

Christian Linhart <chris at DemoRecorder.com> writes:

> Hi Eric and all,
> I have thought a bit about xcb/test.
> I suggest the following:
>   * do xcb/test as a fresh project ( i.e. not clone xcb/demo)
>   * And use a regression test framework for it.
>     I propose to use cppunit. ( https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/cppunit/ )
>   * As far as possible, the tests should run and check themselves automatically without manual intervention needed.
>     Ideally, we'll succeed to have everything running automatically, of course.
> What do you think?
> Chris
> P.S.: Thank you for the info for how to start the process of creating a new project.
> I'll do that soon.

For running the X Test Suite and rendercheck, I'm using piglit as a
testing framework.  What you get from that is the ability to write some
python to generate a list of test binaries to be run, a framework that
executes them, collects their results, and lets you compare results
between runs (including image captures, for rendering tests).

Comparison is of more relevance to GL implementations where you may not
ever pass all your tests, than to unit tests for things like the XCB or
the X Server where we intend to actually be entirely correct according
to our tests.  The downside is that the piglit framework moves pretty
fast and our X stuff frequently gets broken.

For smaller tests, I've been basically satisfied with just bare binaries
with assert()s, like the X Server's test/misc.c.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/attachments/20170331/976d168b/attachment.sig>

More information about the Xcb mailing list