The Test BuildStep would be more useful with a failurePattern argument

[ulfalizer]

When running tests through "make" you usually can't determine success or failure by looking at the exit status. The Test BuildStep? would be more useful if it had a failurePattern argument for recognizing failed tests in the output of the command. This would also let it present a summary of failed tests.

[ulfalizer]

Hmm, seems similar functionality is already present. Undocumented?

[ulfalizer]

Ops, I just realized you usually _can_ determine success by looking at the exit status from "make", by generating a non-0 exit status if a test fails. In my case I'm running the tests on an external device and capturing output, but could still do something like '<get log from device> | grep "All tests succeeded"' I guess.

That makes this slightly less useful, but still handy I guess :)

[dustin]

Where did you notice similar functionality? I'm happy to document if something was missed..

[ulfalizer]

Replying to dustin:

Where did you notice similar functionality? I'm happy to document if something was missed..

I think it was just a misunderstanding on my part. There's some "protected:" stuff in Test (PerlModuleTest? uses it), but nothing you can use directly without subclassing.

So something like this could still be useful. Test taking success/failure/warningPattern arguments would probably cover the needs of lots of users.

[dustin]

Is WarningCountingShellCommand? what you're looking for?

[dustin]

I think I was right 3 months ago (comment 6) -- re-open if not