Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 05 Jul 1999 06:10:02 +1000 | From | Dancer <> | Subject | Re: 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.
D
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |