Path fun on Windows

Adrian Buehlmann adrian at cadifra.com
Wed Jun 6 17:10:38 CDT 2012


On 2012-06-06 16:10, Mads Kiilerich wrote:
> To summarize a bit: There are some inherent problems with posix shell 
> scripting and native windows paths. msys use some tricks to make it 
> work. run-tests add some other tricks to work around the real problem 
> and the msys workarounds, and the tests has to add a few workarounds on 
> top of that. This adds up to quite a bit of complexity that has to be 
> understood ... in addition to understanding both windows and posix. It 
> would be nice to reduce that complexity, but in general it works, and 
> fixing it doesn't have to be on top of the nice-to-have list. Do you agree?

I really don't understand what exactly you mean here, sorry. This text
is rather nebulous to me. So I can't say with what we should agree or not.

What I can agree with and obviously now finally have done, is accepting
the fact that the tests are written as they are and that the best way
currently for testing on Windows (given all stated decisions) is to
indeed use the MSYS shell. Now that I have played with it, it turns out
it works pretty nicely.

It also turns out that you were right with your idea of skipping
isolated sections and I was wrong in assuming that we would have to move
more-feature demanding test bits to the end.


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list