A testcase library

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 01:50:24PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Monday, December 23, 2002, at 11:37 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >I have no idea if you meant that seriously or not...
> 
> I'm serious.
> 
> >think about those, they're meaningless.
> 
> Great, now we have all these meaningless states.

No, we don't have them; DejaGNU won't express them.  The states are:
pass, fail, xpass, xfail, kpass, kfail
  (and warning, perror, note, untested, unresolved, unsupported)

> We already had the ability to add tracking numbers, we already had the 
> ability to sort reports and put failures with tracking numbers up 
> higher in priority, if we wanted.  We already had a way of knowing if 
> the report was known.
> 
> I just don't see any advantages yet.  Maybe the dejagnu document could 
> be expanded to include the advantages of these extra states.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer