Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 22:01:17 +0100 (MET) From: Wilko Bulte <wilko@yedi.iaf.nl> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: terry@lambert.org, kelly@fsl.noaa.gov, gryphon@healer.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ports@freebs.org.iaf.nl Subject: Re: ports startup scripts Message-ID: <199509272101.WAA01282@yedi.iaf.nl> In-Reply-To: <24295.812164359@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Sep 26, 95 06:12:39 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>_ > > > The product is QA'd with the validation suite. 2 hours were required for > > the validation suite, which is interesting, considering POSIX validation > > takes less time to run. > > Sorry, this statement simply leads me to believe that you've never > worked on anything of significant size or complexity. 2 hours is > about how long it took to brief the QA team on how to structure the > run at most large ISVs I've worked at! :-) If you got the results back > in 3 or 4 days you considered it a rush job. I used to do (amongst other things) X/Open validation work. Believe me that you are going for your friendly colleagues throats when the XPG suite falls over once more. Generally say 4 - 5 runs were needed to get everything thru the XPG. And that was only XPG/2. XPG > 2 is worse. The SVVS (SVID test) is a piece of &*^*( And don't talk about bugs in your infallible test suite.. Sigh... And who writes this flawless testsuite BTW? ;-) Wilko > Jordan _ __________________________________________________________________________ | / o / / _ Wilko Bulte email: wilko@yedi.iaf.nl |/|/ / / /( (_) Private FreeBSD site - Arnhem - The Netherlands --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509272101.WAA01282>