From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 20 02:52:14 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31C6CCBF for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 02:52:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julio@meroh.net) Received: from mail-lb0-f180.google.com (mail-lb0-f180.google.com [209.85.217.180]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0E542F92 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 02:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lb0-f180.google.com with SMTP id q8so4425258lbi.11 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 19:52:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=L/SgYARgG8N8zeu12pYeF8JS1n19tbrh/fGbz77EjIY=; b=RvEV72Iph552hADykTDMXVpgEYfKNLjgtGgxuUCC93EeFnp56psy6Qcc/Nmu50KFyI Ssi8zz1Zc0rMGT1ziQprmKu0hHvT7Lw24D8jUaLzf+RSMMdRuRLdHf5Vy8FMsvXNRMo7 hZe6ncWaw4vCKsJMdkNsBWdza9awQ/JV/Vb3q7FYALLqNFsYY9YfBFs/8XYSZ85uOK+m BTzCuDZHrY9zEh6ySdFKOiFr44/U84BO18TKh6rIiRxhcLD2u6lRQ9F3lvoyoKmsAflz jv1vnZgg1dy1FoEq8lVm2xriiHrq1Tb8QXwpvRhup3H24ZJBc3DI5HEj9MdpTVpxADPv dF6w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm7A9kZHE5oFvc6FUVRzzPJiAHEtksnXyhz7x0TOG2XCIsxwHm9Y4QUGNn99mPfdMag7u+y X-Received: by 10.112.172.137 with SMTP id bc9mr7829883lbc.21.1382237524817; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 19:52:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.132.135 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 19:51:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [108.176.158.82] In-Reply-To: <6DC6C1E8-7AEF-439E-9250-D223A56EF432@gmail.com> References: <6DC6C1E8-7AEF-439E-9250-D223A56EF432@gmail.com> From: Julio Merino Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 22:51:44 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Populating /usr/tests To: Garrett Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" , Rui Paulo , Simon Gerraty X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 02:52:14 -0000 On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > You're missing a lot of code in etc/, some in Makefile.inc1, and other pieces in share/mk as well with bsd.own.mk. Also, your approach with tests/Makefile is ok, but it doesn't partition well with prove.test.mk on my branch, etc. Hello Garrett, It's not obvious to me what you mean by "missing a lot of code" so I'm going to have to guess. Here are the two possibilities that come to mind: The first is: the patches are missing something because they won't behave in the intended way (where intended = what their description says). If that's the case, I really don't know what's missing and I'd like you to elaborate a bit more please. The patches seem to work and they do what their description says (no more and hopefully no less). Keep in mind that the scope of these patches is quite restricted and their only goal is "plug existing tests into /usr/tests". The second is: the patches are missing something because they don't do everything you already have on your branch. This is certainly the case. I'm not intending to cover all cases at once: it's easier to go step by step with small and easy to review proposals. Additional features can be built on top later and existing code can still be very easily tweaked. Now, because I think the second case is the most likely of the two... I'm still not really sure about what exactly you are referring to! I took a look at your branch and I can't see major differences in the basic code to bring /usr/tests up and running. One thing I found is that you have a tests-specific mtree file, which is a nice idea and I have brought that into the patchset. The other things that I could see... well, they may be necessary later on, but they don't seem to be required for this specific patchset. (In other words: they have to be looked at, but they can probably be looked at separately on their own.) Along these lines: do you have any suggestions on how to extract the set of changes in your branch that are not in head? I'm not talking about a diff: I'm talking about a collection of patches (or commits) describing the differences between HEAD and your branch in a semantical manner. Looking at a snapshot of the tree and comparing differences is really difficult and does not give any idea on how the changes were built. (Sorry, I don't know git enough nor your repository to do this easily; I believe it's possible, but it escapes me how.) Thanks, -- Julio Merino / @jmmv