Subject: Re: Plans for importing ATF
To: David Holland <>
From: Bill Stouder-Studenmund <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 11/08/2007 23:08:38
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 09:47:53PM -0500, David Holland wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 02:46:15PM +0100, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
>  > As a matter of fact, there are a couple of sh(1) regression tests =20
>  > that fail at the moment in current, and I bet they remain unfixed =20
>  > because no one actually executed the test suite to discover them =20
>  > (which is understandable because it's not trivial to do). =20
> Enh, what's so hard about "cd /usr/src/regress/bin/sh && make regress"?

Uhm, figuring out if it's ok or not. :-)

> I think the problem is that most of the sh tests check things
> sufficiently obscure that most people aren't willing to venture an
> opinion regarding whether it's sh or a failing test that's wrong.
> Then, the set of people willing to fiddle inside sh probably isn't
> that large either.

The test harness should tell us if the test fails or not. So it shouldn't=
matter if I know nothing about a subsystem, I can tell if a test passed or=
not. Obviously, if I know nothing about a subsection, I can't really fix=20
it. But if the test passed before I made a change and failed after, well,=
there we go. :-)

Take care,


Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (NetBSD)