Spam: Re: [Mono-devel-list] minor xslttest makefile patch

[Atsushi Eno]

Hello,

Andrew Skiba wrote:
> Atsushi Eno wrote:
>> Are they really such testcases? I think those tests listed up
>> there are bug in your sed script. The previous catalog.xml which
>> I manually edited was pointing to the correct file names. Just
>> compare old catalog.xml and your catalog-fixed.xml.
>>
> 
> Can you tell me exactly what did you fix by hand? As for the first 
> question, here is the list of tests that throw exception on dotnet and 
> were marked as regressions in the first list.

As for your request, with these simple steps below you can find
what is missing in your catalog.sed (as well as what I missed):

wget 
http://svn.myrealbox.com/viewcvs/*checkout*/trunk/mcs/class/System.XML/Test/System.Xml.Xsl/standalone_tests/catalog.diff?rev=40689
mv catalog.diff\@rev\=40689 old-catalog.diff
patch catalog.xml old-catalog.diff -o catalog-correct.xml
diff catalog-correct.xml catalog-fixed.xml

As for regression matter ...

I guess originally you might have done the "original" test run
under Windows, and run on Unix environment today. But it will
apparently show the difference. I have no further idea why
they look like "regressions". They must have originally failed
under Unixy environment.

> BVTs_bvt083

Please re-read my first reply. This is not the missing-file case.

> ConflictResolution__77902

Well, this actually is an error in the stylesheet (includes
"xslt09009a.xsl" while there is only "XSLT09009a.xsl"). So this
testcase is invalid. Since on Windows file names are case
insensitice, MS.NET will pass this testcase. Anyways this is not
Mono's "regression" and should be ignored instead.

> Include__77736

There is no xslt03022.xsl. There is only XSLT03022.xsl.

> Include_Include_IncludedStylesheetShouldHaveDifferentBaseUri

Similar to ConflictResolution__77902 there is no "TestInc"
directory (and even worse the path includes backslash).
Should be ignored as well.

> Include_RelUriTest1

Ditto. No "include" directory.

> And there are few testcases that are not catched by the current 
> testsuite, probably should check them manually (may be they really pass?)

 > Elements__89171
 > Elements__89177

They are the case: no Plants.xml but plants.xml.

> Output__84011

No OutputText.xml but Outputtext.xml.

> Text__78309

No XSLT05001.xml but xslt05001.xml.


> Currently we have only 2:
> 
> selected
> checked

Ahh, gotcha. Yeah let's add those you listed up as well.

Atsushi Eno