[Xapian-tickets] [Xapian] #832: Compiling xapian with meson. Strange error in tests.

[Xapian]

#832: Compiling xapian with meson. Strange error in tests.
--------------------------+-------------------------------
 Reporter:  mgautier      |             Owner:  Olly Betts
     Type:  task          |            Status:  new
 Priority:  normal        |         Milestone:
Component:  Build system  |           Version:
 Severity:  normal        |        Resolution:
 Keywords:                |        Blocked By:
 Blocking:                |  Operating System:  All
--------------------------+-------------------------------
Comment (by Olly Betts):

 > Aside of meson, I think the two commits ​https://github.com/openzim
 /xapian-meson/commit/4b302ec704f7b80860a0cf62b5c446341ace8e8b

 This isn't the right fix.  The condition `path && remote` is not true for
 any of the current test harness backends, so your patch effectively just
 disables these two testcases.  The key point here is that `remote` in the
 condition means that the test harness managed backend is a remote one, not
 that the remote backend is enabled in the library.  We actually want to
 run these testcases only for non-remote test harness backends, for which
 we generate a database and put its path in a stub file to access using
 `xapian-progsrv`, then try to check the database (which isn't implemented
 but we want to at least check it fails with an appropriate exception).
 Probably the best way to address potentially not having the remote backend
 is to check for `FeatureUnavailableError` being thrown instead if
 `XAPIAN_HAS_REMOTE_BACKEND` is not defined.  I've pushed a change to do
 that, which should fix this for you.

 Also these two testcases are pretty much the same testcase so one should
 just be removed.  I've done that too.

 > and ​https://github.com/openzim/xapian-
 meson/commit/88a068e42ec655853e1fb072295a8d9722c3b64b are commits you want
 to integrate.

 This one looks good (aside from whitespace) - applied.

 > Can you directly apply them or you prefer I do separated PR(s) ?

 If you have further fixes PRs are definitely preferred (and against master
 unless the fix is only relevant for 1.4.x like the second one here).  You
 seem to have imported just xapian-core into a fresh git repo, so I can't
 just cherry-pick commits across to the xapian repo, and generating and
 applying patches is fiddly because you seem to have generated files
 committed and be using different paths.  PRs also get CI tested
 automatically.
-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.xapian.org/ticket/832#comment:6>
Xapian <https://xapian.org/>
Xapian