re: CVS commit: src

[matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost>]

> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:21:22PM +0100, Matthias Scheler wrote:
> > > We have nearly five hundred test files.
> > 
> > This is a problem why?
> 
> Because most of these are potentially a subject of similar hypothesis.
> 
> > > ... whereas the libc-tests should be strictly about functional 
> > > verification.
> > 
> > This about functional testing. This is whether the environment code works
> > with and without real locking, with and without "libpthread" present.
> 
> I'd say this is about non-functional testing, but this is just semantics.
> The kind of granularity that is seeked here does not give that much useful
> additional information. Alternatively, by linking the old "t_environment"
> test with pthreads, we now know also whether this is caused by linking alone.

considering that we've had bugs related to this in the past i think
that having both types of this particular test is entirely the right
thing to do here.  it may be a special case in that we don't want to
have a slew of _pthread versions, but IMO this one should be put back.


.mrg.