Cmockery + hudson

85 views
Skip to first unread message

john

unread,
Dec 8, 2010, 4:00:06 PM12/8/10
to Cmockery
Does anybody use cmockery with hudson or any other continuous
integration server? Is there a C testing framework supported by a
continuous integration server?

Steve Byan

unread,
Dec 8, 2010, 4:26:30 PM12/8/10
to cmoc...@googlegroups.com, john

On Dec 8, 2010, at 4:00 PM, john wrote:

> Does anybody use cmockery with hudson or any other continuous
> integration server?

Yes, we use it here in a project in NetApp's Advanced Technology Group. We've modified cmockery to product JUnit-compatible XML reports, and cons'd up a test runner that walks a directory tree, runs all the unit-test executables it finds, and compiles the results into a JUnit-compatible <test_suites> XML report. It also can run a subset of the tests.

I've permission to release this code, but have yet to put the effort into getting it past our legal department's review. Unfortunately, to get cmockery working on LP64 platforms as well as the original ILP32 platform, we've had to make some tweaks to the API. Also, I've yet to test our changes on 32-bit and 64-bit Windows, although it's our intent to have our changes work on those platforms too. Is this code something you'd be interested in?

> Is there a C testing framework supported by a
> continuous integration server?

It's not too hard to cons up a JUnit-compatible report; see <http://ant.1045680.n5.nabble.com/schema-for-junit-xml-output-td1375274.html> for a description of the XML schema.

Have you considered using a C++ testing framework to test your C code? I think Google Test already outputs reports that Hudson can digest.

Best regards,
-Steve

--
Steve Byan <Steve...@netapp.com>
Member of Technical Staff
Network Appliance, Inc.
1601 Trapelo Road - Suite 16
Waltham, MA 02451
(781) 672-3853

john

unread,
Dec 8, 2010, 5:06:55 PM12/8/10
to Cmockery
> Have you considered using a C++ testing framework to test your C code? I think Google Test already outputs reports that Hudson can digest.

I have not considered this yet but it seems like a solid option that I
will pursue.

> I've permission to release this code, but have yet to put the effort into getting it past our legal department's review. Unfortunately, to get cmockery working on LP64 platforms as well as the original ILP32 platform, we've had > to make some tweaks to the API. Also, I've yet to test our changes on 32-bit and 64-bit Windows, although it's our intent to have our changes work on those platforms too. Is this code something you'd be interested in?

If Google Test does not suffice I may be interested but at this time
your efforts with the legal department would be wasted.

Thank you for the quick reply.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages