From 3a4077d3c10d159da2d81274f7c151cc8b787952 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: brarcher Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 21:35:14 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] doc: make it clear that autotools is not necessary to use check Autotools is used to build Check, but it is not necessary to use autotools for unit tests linked against Check. git-svn-id: svn+ssh://svn.code.sf.net/p/check/code/trunk@868 64e312b2-a51f-0410-8e61-82d0ca0eb02a --- doc/check.texi | 20 +++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/check.texi b/doc/check.texi index 4335aca..6a80f06 100644 --- a/doc/check.texi +++ b/doc/check.texi @@ -195,12 +195,13 @@ test framework will happily note a unit test error, and chug along. The Check framework is also designed to play happily with common development environments for C programming. The author designed Check around Autoconf/Automake (thus the name Check: @command{make check} is -the idiom used for testing with Autoconf/Automake), and the test -failure messages thrown up by Check use the common idiom of -@samp{filename:linenumber:message} used by @command{gcc} and family to -report problems in source code. With (X)Emacs, the output of Check -allows one to quickly navigate to the location of the unit test that -failed; presumably that also works in VI and IDEs. +the idiom used for testing with Autoconf/Automake). Note however that +Autoconf/Automake are NOT necessary to use Check; any build system +is sufficent. The test failure messages thrown up by Check use the +common idiom of @samp{filename:linenumber:message} used by @command{gcc} +and family to report problems in source code. With (X)Emacs, the output +of Check allows one to quickly navigate to the location of the unit test +that failed; presumably that also works in VI and IDEs. @menu * Other Frameworks for C:: @@ -353,9 +354,10 @@ and a place to store our unit tests, @file{check_money.c}. We want to integrate these core files into our build system, and will need some additional structure. To manage everything we'll use Autoconf, Automake, and friends (collectively known as Autotools) for this -example. One could do something similar with ordinary Makefiles, but -in the authors' opinion, it is generally easier to use Autotools than -bare Makefiles, and they provide built-in support for running tests. +example. Note that one could do something similar with ordinary +Makefiles, or any other builc system. It is in the authors' opinion that +it is generally easier to use Autotools than bare Makefiles, and they +provide built-in support for running tests. Note that this is not the place to explain how Autotools works. If you need help understanding what's going on beyond the explanations -- 2.40.0