Re: PR/57918 CVS commit: src/usr.bin/kdump

[Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR bin/57918; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>
To: Taylor R Campbell <riastradh%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Cc: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost, gnats-admin%NetBSD.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost,
        christos%NetBSD.org@localhost
Subject: Re: PR/57918 CVS commit: src/usr.bin/kdump
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 04:31:57 +0700

     Date:        Sun, 11 Feb 2024 14:43:13 +0000
     From:        Taylor R Campbell <riastradh%NetBSD.org@localhost>
     Message-ID:  <20240211144313.439526086B%jupiter.mumble.net@localhost>
 
   | Would be nice if we had automatic tests for this too,
 
 I'm not a big fan of adding tests for bugs that have been fixed,
 except where there's a reason to believe the bug might reappear
 (as in sources that we update from somewhere upstream, or perhaps
 something that is tricky and not obvious - neither of which applies
 here).
 
 Still, if there were kdump tests already, as a model, I could be
 persuaded to add one I guess, but without a foundation, I don't
 really have any thoughts on how to test kdump in any meaningful
 way.
 
   | and we should get this pulled up.
 
 I don't really think this is a serious enough (as in affects enough
 people) to bother the -10 release cycle with a pullup request right
 now, but after -10 is released, a pullup for 10.0_STABLE (and so to
 be in 10.1) is probably warranted.   I'm less convinced this is worth
 any effort at all for -9, and I'm convinced it isn't for -8.
 
 But if you disagree, feel free to send in pullup requests yourself,
 those don't need to come from the developer who made the changes.
 
 Alternatively change the PR status to "needs pullups" and assign it
 to me if you like.
 
 kre