lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [ANNOUNCE] The Linux Test Project has been released for FEBRUARY 2011.
    Date
    On Wednesday, March 02, 2011 14:45:38 Garrett Cooper wrote:
    > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:23 AM, Subrata Modak
    >
    > <subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
    > > On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 13:06 +0100, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
    > >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Shubham Goyal
    > >>
    > >> <shubham@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
    > >> > Hi,
    > >> >
    > >> > The Linux Test Project test suite has been released for the month of
    > >> > FEBRUARY 2011. Please see ltp/INSTALL file carefully, as there has
    > >> > been multiple changes for building/installing the test suite after the
    > >> > recent changes in Makefile infrastructure.
    > >>
    > >> Wouldn't make sense to integrate this test suite in the kernel source
    > >> tree?
    > >
    > > There was discussion like this some few years back. The idea was to get
    > > some core tests from LTP to the kernel source tree. But then the idea
    > > was dropped probably to avoid maintenance overhead ;-)
    >
    > Putting LTP in the kernel.org sources really doesn't make sense for
    > the following reasons:
    >
    > 1. LTP isn't really tied to a single kernel release.
    > 2. LTP isn't the only test project out there for Linux.
    > 3. LTP has more stuff than it needs to have for testing out the kernel
    > (well, it did more in the past before I started cleaning it up in the
    > past couple of months).
    > 4. Maintaining it will become a political bloodbath for both parties
    > as Linux is loosely managed by Linus et all, and LTP has been largely
    > developed by SGI and maintained by IBM and a few other parties like
    > Fujitsu, Nokia, Redhat, etc.
    > 5. Integrating LTP into Kbuild, etc would probably be non-trivial due
    > to the size of LTP (but it might be easier after the Makefile
    > restructuring I did a year and a half ago).

    these are all very good reasons. additional points:
    - ltp is pretty fsckin huge
    - ltp often times tests both sides of the userspace API/ABI -- between the
    kernel and the C library, and the C library and end applications
    -mike
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-03-02 22:51    [W:0.026 / U:0.092 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site