Replies: 2 comments 15 replies
-
If you want to be thorough, the test262 suite should be run. There is a fast variant, but even the "slow" one is fast enough now, thanks to the multi-threading enhancements Ben made. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
11 replies
-
I tested
The exit code is 0 regardless of the last line, since we have some expected test failures. I don't think the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
4 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
I am trying to package the next-gen version of QuickJS in Guix - which may replace the older, unmaintained version or exist as it's own new package - that, I'll have to ask the Guix maintainers.
Usually the packages build out of the box without any issues just by setting the build system (in this case,
cmake-build-system
), but given how CTest wasn't used (hope that I am not wrong here), I wish to understand - as a package maintainer, what relevant tests should I run to ensure that the package expression ensures reproducible builds?Is
make test
enough? Because in my system, excludingtest
, all the other test rule in Makefile fails (test262
,test262-check
,test262-fast
andtest262-update
).Also relevant to the earlier point - is it okay if I do not pull submodules (
test262
) when trying to build?Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions