Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:10:38 +0200 From: "Alexander Leidinger" <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: "Garrett Cooper" <yanefbsd@gmail.com> Cc: jkoshy@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: TET and other testing framework for FreeBSD Message-ID: <20080722111038.21404k434075zx8g@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <7d6fde3d0807212343i69526416h35a3d961fac0c9d9@mail.gmail.com> References: <7d6fde3d0807212343i69526416h35a3d961fac0c9d9@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting "Garrett Cooper" <yanefbsd@gmail.com> (from Mon, 21 Jul 2008 =20 23:43:11 -0700): > Hi Joseph (and hackers), > I'm contacting Joseph primarily because I saw his name listed > under the TET page (http://wiki.freebsd.org/TetIntegration) as a > contact and was wondering whether or not there was any interest to > integrate test suites outside of TET into FreeBSD, but I'm also > involving hackers@ because there might be some references that someone > can provide me for other @freebsd folks. AFAIK there's no TET stuff for FreeBSD available in public. So I would =20 say it's more having regression tests available (making them compile =20 and run on FreeBSD, having a look at the failing tests and see if it =20 is a problem with the test or with FreeBSD ... see below for my =20 experience with the LTP) at all, than integrating them. > I ask because my work with LTP (Linux Test Project : > http://ltp.sf.net) for Cisco has allowed me some insight into using > OpenPOSIX and Ballista testing frameworks, which may prove helpful in > the release testing cause, and could help in detecting faults earlier > on, thus helping expedite the release process a bit more and > increasing confidence and interest in FreeBSD. Do you have any URLs or whatever besides the LTP one (where those are =20 integrated) to get those tests from an official point instead from =20 cutting it out of the LTP? > I'm pretty sure I have the blessings of the Ballista project's > principal investigator to relicense it under the BSD / GPL license, > it's currently a 'dead project' and he gave his blessings to post the > source up on Sourceforge, but I'll double check to make sure I have > his AOK before doing so... I think it would be beneficial so the what this produces on FreeBSD =20 (the license doesn't matter here) before we go and talk about =20 integration (here the license matters). > I'm also working on getting tst_res (1.) dually licensed from > the LTP folks with a BSD / GPL license to allow for better inclusion > into FreeBSD's infrastructure, to ensure that we have a deterministic > means of dealing with testcases and reporting. > Just wondering what, if any, interest would be in adopting and > applying this work to FreeBSD for the good of the community. If this is what is used in the LTP to run some tests, I have to say it =20 does not look mature. I've run the LTP a lot in FreeBSD (native linux =20 binaries, http://wiki.FreeBSD.org/linux-kernel/ltp ... LTP not run and =20 updated the page since a long time) to test the linux compatibility =20 layer, and the are several places where tests fail and no output is =20 produced or even the summary said the test passed. I even opened bug =20 reports at the LTP page on SF, but it seems nobody was interested in =20 those reports. There are also some other ideas, like using the protocol the perl test =20 suites use, to be able to use existing perl stuff to generate reports =20 and overviews out of the generated logs (AFAIR this was the idea =20 behind some changes to the existing regression tests a long time ago). Bye, Alexander. --=20 I read Playboy for the same reason I read National Geographic. To see the sights I'm never going to visit. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080722111038.21404k434075zx8g>