Thread: installcheck vs regression DLLs

Hi!

When running "make installcheck", the DLL files for the regression tests
are loaded from the source tree "../../../contrib/" etc. While this
certainly makes a bit sense, it poses a problem for binary
distributions that want to run the regression tests. It also causes a
small problem for the msvc build in that the DLL files are built into a
$(top)/Debug/<dllname>/<dllname>.dll and thus needs to manually be
copied there.

Would it make sense to have a standard way to run the regression tests
against DLL files on the *installed* system? Perhaps even have
installcheck do so? Meaning it would load the DLLs or .so's from $libdir
instead of the source tree?

If not, other suggestions on how to solve it? 

//Magnus

Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> Would it make sense to have a standard way to run the regression tests
> against DLL files on the *installed* system?

The RPMs do this, but their solution is pretty darn ugly: ship the test
files along with a custom Makefile (and I think they have to patch the
test files, too).  I'm not entirely convinced that it's worth the trouble.
        regards, tom lane

> > Would it make sense to have a standard way to run the regression tests
> > against DLL files on the *installed* system?
> 
> The RPMs do this, but their solution is pretty darn ugly: ship the test
> files along with a custom Makefile (and I think they have to patch the
> test files, too).  I'm not entirely convinced that it's worth the trouble.
> 

It's just to avoid the ugliness i thought we might want to provide something like this in core. Otherwise there will be
localizedugliness in the different 
 
packages because it has to be solved somehow.

what really is the motivation for keeping some of the tested binaries in the sourcetree when doing installcheck?

/Magnus

"Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> what really is the motivation for keeping some of the tested binaries in the sourcetree when doing installcheck?

As opposed to what?  We're certainly not going to *install* regress.so,
and I can't see requiring contrib to be there either.  These are test
files, not part of the installation-under-test.
        regards, tom lane

> > what really is the motivation for keeping some of the tested binaries in the sourcetree when doing installcheck?
> 
> As opposed to what?  We're certainly not going to *install* regress.so,
> and I can't see requiring contrib to be there either.  These are test
> files, not part of the installation-under-test.

That would've been my suggestion since I'd say they're both. But if that's not happening and nobody has a better idea,
thenworkaround it is. I'll try to make 
 
it as non-ugly as I can. 

/Magnus