Re: [LTP] Remaining *at cleanup

[Jeff B. <jb...@ra...>]

On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 09:44:36AM +0800, Yi CDL Yang wrote:

That doesn't make sense to me though.  If you've built a new kernel,
getting the matching headers is as easy as "make headers_install". 
Someone updating their kernel should generally update their headers as
well.  It's the equivalent of installing a new version of a library and
failing to install the matching header files.

The argument that *does* make sense to me is that someone might use ltp
to test older kernels, in which case those syscalls don't exist yet.  In
those cases where the data isn't even available to compile them, the
compilation should fail gracefully.

But in both of those cases, the defines shouldn't be in the testsuite
itself - it's just different coping methods for when they're not there.

Tks,
Jeff Bailey

> I think your patch shouldn't do that way, LTP is not only used to test the
> distro but also test a new kernel, so the header file is unnecessarily
> ready, So the best way is to define it if it isn't defined.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the cleanup for the rest of the *at tests.
> 
> Tks,
> Jeff Bailey
> 
> --
> I do not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your
> right to say it.
>  - Voltaire
> (See attached file: ltpat.diff)
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job
> easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Ltp-list mailing list
> Ltp...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list







-- 
I do not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it. 
 - Voltaire