Re: More cleverer QA config needed? (was Re: [pcp] NSS/NSPR Testing Status)

[Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/30/2012 03:18 AM, Nathan Scott wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> > ...
> > So, approach used so far is to add the sort of tests we have now
> > (PCP version based) as an initial "will this compile at all" check,
> > then a subsequent "dynamic" check is done via a call into a libpcp
> > routine that was added at the time of the initial feature commit.
> >
> > There's pros and cons.  NSS doesn't actually have a routine like
> > this and we'd have to add something.  Need to think further on the
> > best option I think - maybe adding in a feature-test interface to
> > libpcp (analogous to sysconf(3), but less int-based) and also a
> > helper tool (something like getconf(1), for QA)?
> >
> > Another option would be to use the pkg-config tool I guess.  Or we
> > continue on the query-interface-per-feature path, which works too.
> Attached patch is an initial pass (untested) at approach #1 for your
> consideration & amusement.  I came across the existing pmconfig(1) &
> made this fit into that tool, with similar APIs.
>
> Thoughts?
I like the idea of being able to query the library regarding its 
features/capabilities. This would certainly be useful for testing and 
would likely be useful for applications using the library.
Dave