Fix dart apptest flake on android.

Fix dart apptest flake on android.

There's a good discussion of this issue in dart-lang/test#333. In short,
tearDownAll is guaranteed to be called after all tests run. However,
apptest.dart explicitly calls close() in tearDownAll, which closes the shell.

This close races against the test framework getting around to outputting
"All tests pass!". So this patch works around it by instead looking for the
message about tearDownAll running with no previously failed tests.

BUG=Fixes #394
R=johnmccutchan@google.com, zra@google.com

Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/mojo/+/66269650afe77c016cd33903e5d02ea05d879660

[tonyg, 2016-01-09 00:10:02]

Description was changed from

==========
Fix dart apptest flake on android.

There's a good discussion of this issue in dart-lang/test#333. In short,
tearDownAll is guaranteed to be called after all tests run. However,
apptest.dart explicitly calls close() in tearDownAll, which closes the shell.

This close races against the test framework getting around to outputting
"All tests pass!". So this patch works around it by instead looking for the
message about tearDownAll running with no previously failed tests.

BUG=Fixes #394
==========

to

==========
Fix dart apptest flake on android.

There's a good discussion of this issue in dart-lang/test#333. In short,
tearDownAll is guaranteed to be called after all tests run. However,
apptest.dart explicitly calls close() in tearDownAll, which closes the shell.

This close races against the test framework getting around to outputting
"All tests pass!". So this patch works around it by instead looking for the
message about tearDownAll running with no previously failed tests.

BUG=Fixes #394
==========

[tonyg, 2016-01-09 00:10:02]

tonyg@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ johnmccutchan@google.com, zra@google.com

[zra, 2016-01-09 03:02:24]

This lgtm as a temporary fix.

I wonder if fixing https://github.com/domokit/mojo/issues/487 would be the real
fix for this as well. I have some thoughts about a possible solution on that
bug, but I haven't had time to try anything out, yet.

Would this fix let us move mojo:dart_apptests outside of the != android guard
here?

https://github.com/domokit/mojo/blob/master/mojo/tools/data/apptests#L133

[Cutch, 2016-01-11 15:10:15]

Thanks!

LGTM

[tonyg, 2016-01-11 17:18:24]

Description was changed from

==========
Fix dart apptest flake on android.

There's a good discussion of this issue in dart-lang/test#333. In short,
tearDownAll is guaranteed to be called after all tests run. However,
apptest.dart explicitly calls close() in tearDownAll, which closes the shell.

This close races against the test framework getting around to outputting
"All tests pass!". So this patch works around it by instead looking for the
message about tearDownAll running with no previously failed tests.

BUG=Fixes #394
==========

to

==========
Fix dart apptest flake on android.

There's a good discussion of this issue in dart-lang/test#333. In short,
tearDownAll is guaranteed to be called after all tests run. However,
apptest.dart explicitly calls close() in tearDownAll, which closes the shell.

This close races against the test framework getting around to outputting
"All tests pass!". So this patch works around it by instead looking for the
message about tearDownAll running with no previously failed tests.

BUG=Fixes #394
R=johnmccutchan@google.com, zra@google.com

Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/mojo/+/66269650afe77c016cd33903e5d...
==========

[tonyg, 2016-01-11 17:18:25]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1) manually as
66269650afe77c016cd33903e5d02ea05d879660 (presubmit successful).

[tonyg, 2016-01-11 17:23:56]

On 2016/01/09 03:02:24, zra wrote:
> This lgtm as a temporary fix.
> 
> I wonder if fixing https://github.com/domokit/mojo/issues/487 would be the
real
> fix for this as well. I have some thoughts about a possible solution on that
> bug, but I haven't had time to try anything out, yet.

That's very possible.

> Would this fix let us move mojo:dart_apptests outside of the != android guard
> here?

It should. That's my intent in making this change (but for a repo that depends
on mojo). I'm not planning to try it in this repo.