Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 12:26:07 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" <freebsd-testing@freebsd.org>, Peter Holm <peter@holm.cc> Subject: Re: ATF work Message-ID: <CAGHfRMC23H0oYdytwfXjN3C3BT7U%2B_eKnsSMc-og8yRmTs1BVA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOtMX2hEqRk_w9HnXczMnhcou_e6Q%2BWa%2BNXFY7MgsjKiO4Kydg@mail.gmail.com> References: <20140402085349.GA61802@x2.osted.lan> <CAOtMX2gGn5NMpvSR0FF=z70cUCDn=vTQvVWo2mXk8t9UrNKzuA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGHfRMBKcfK_AD-bwUo3ifVp1qwoPfnoEA9z=Pp59RNAoeyW_A@mail.gmail.com> <20140404190543.GA652@mastodon.meroh.net> <CAOtMX2hEqRk_w9HnXczMnhcou_e6Q%2BWa%2BNXFY7MgsjKiO4Kydg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Julio Merino <jmmv@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> Just a couple of minor comments:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:07:04AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>> (Just to fill in some context on some of the items here)
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> > lib/libc/tests/net/Makefile has one tested comment out with the
>>> > comment "test uses rump". Would it be possible instead to leave the
>>> > test in the build, but put "require.progs rump_server" in the relevant
>>> > test cases' heads?
>>>
>>> Probably carryover from NetBSD that should be pushed back to NetBSD.
>>
>> Why? rump is "standard" in NetBSD so that's probably not going to fly.
>> It'd be like saying "require.progs = ls".
>
> I don't know about NetBSD, but FreeBSD has a lot of optional stuff in
> base that's compiled in by default. For example, the entire Bluetooth
> stack can be disabled by WITHOUT_BLUETOOTH=yes make buildworld. At
> $WORK, I disabled a whole bunch of stuff that way to slim down our
> product's image. A deeply embedded system, I'm sure, would disable
> even more. If rump can be disabled in a NetBSD build, then it would
> be worthwhile for rump-based ATF tests to identify themselves via
> require.progs.
Rump is optional, so I think that Alan's point is valid (from
http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?mk.conf++NetBSD-current):
MKRUMP Can be set to ``yes'' or ``no''. Indicates whether the
rump(3) headers, libraries and programs are to be
installed.
Default: ``yes''
I'll add that to my fork.
Thanks!
-Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGHfRMC23H0oYdytwfXjN3C3BT7U%2B_eKnsSMc-og8yRmTs1BVA>