[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Are there kernel testing suites out there? We need them.
    Alan Cox wrote:
    > > That works, but adding a mechanized regression test would
    > > be painless, and might give us earlier warnings if and when
    > > a few bad things (like ext2 fs corruption) creep back into
    > Automatic regression tests very rarely help. Most of the bugs that
    > get into a shipping kernel now are ones I can't reproduce even given a
    > description let alone find randomly
    > > corporations love. Red Hat, for instance, might well feel
    > > inclined to set up a mechanized regression test to give
    > > it a little added certainty that it's not about to ship a lemon.
    > Guess which turns up lemons best, the automated testing or the beta program.

    I think both ways are good. I don't recall automated testing ever
    finding a bug in any of my code that wasn't alpha. However, we _do_ add
    tests for bugs that are found and fixed for two reasons: 1) To make sure
    we actually fixed it, 2) Sometimes bugs come back - especially when all
    your fix did was to temporarily mask it.

    Stupid little repeat-glitches are the biggie...especially when you have
    more than one person working on the code.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.020 / U:149.852 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site