Subject: Re: ipf regression tests
To: Martti Kuparinen <email@example.com>
From: Martti Kuparinen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/11/2002 11:57:17
On Sat, 11 May 2002, Martti Kuparinen wrote:
> > I think I know why you want to do it this way, but I don't like that way.
> Me either, but I wouldn't like to change all tests to match our layout, it
> would be easier to use the tests as they are in the original distribution.
> I'll re-consider this today...
I've considered this again and came to the following conclusions:
* Regression tests are performed in /usr/src/regress
* /usr/src/dist/ipf should contain unmodified(?) distribution of ipf
* We need to change some tests (to fix errors) but dist/ipf/test should be
* It's possible to create a new Makefile in regress/sys/kern/ipf (we have
already done this in usr.sbin/ipf/ipftest/test) but it's easy to forget
later as we have previously seen with usr.sbin/ipf/ipftest/test/Makefile.
The problem here is that original tests are not here, i.e. there's no
DARRENR branch available. Without that vendor branch we only have a locally
created file (like in usr.sbin/ipf/ipftest/test). How should we handle
updates to this file? Get the official file and modify it manually every
time? I don't like this at all...
* Importing the original tests to regress/sys/kern/ipf is good because
it's easy to modify the main trunk with our local fixes and it's still
easy to merge new versions to main trunk when new versions of ipf are
imported (i.e. the same thing we are doing today with sys/netinet etc).
Based on these, my proposal is this:
* There will be 4 different locations with DARRENR vendor branch (dist/ipf,
sys/netinet, sys/lkm/netinet/if_ipl and regress/sys/kern/ipf) instead of
the 3 we have today.
* Remove dist/ipf/test
Does this sound reasonable?
Martti Kuparinen <email@example.com> NetBSD - No media hype