tests building

[Ian Monroe]

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Maximilian Kossick
<maximilian.kossick at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Ian Monroe <ian.monroe at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Maximilian Kossick
>> <maximilian.kossick at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Those two errors can be easily fixed by providing dummy
>>> implementations that don't do anything in the
>>> CollectionLocationTest.cpp
>>>
>>> I'm not sure whether the linker will start complaining about
>>> SvgHandler being missing
>>>
>>
>> Shouldn't we just link to libamarok? Dummy implementations of random
>> functions sounds a bit hacky to me.
>
> Well, they are tests, so being a bit hacky is not an issue.
>
> Linking to libamarok should be avoided as we cannot really control the
> side effects. In the current state of Amarok it is very easy to
> accidentally start all other components of amarok (main window,
> collection manager, engine controller, and so on...). That defeats the
> point of a unit test (and makes it horribly slow)

Well I guess I was worried about it being hard to maintain more then
anything. And also inaccurate.

Ian