Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:39:32 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Unit/regression testing (was Re: Priorities for next release?) On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 12:23:17PM -0700, Nathan McSween wrote: > >Other requests? > > Unit tests of some sort, it helps to document the code as well as > stop some regressions. There are already a number of different tests; see: http://nsz.repo.hu/git/ http://git.etalabs.net/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi https://github.com/lmarcetic/cluts for some that were developed specifically with musl in mind. We've also been using: http://posixtest.sourceforge.net/ but it's rather outdated and incorrect in some areas. I've intentionally kept tests out of the main musl source tree for two reasons: For one thing, I want to avoid burdening non-developers who just want to download musl to use it with unnecessary download/storage bulk. But the other reason is that I want the majority of libc test cases to be libc-agnostic, i.e. designed to run against any libc, not just musl. In that case, including them as part of musl feels wrong. I do however also want to develop some musl-specific regression tests for things that can't be tested in a generic way: things like ensuring that static linking doesn't pull in modules it shouldn't, that unnecessary syscall overhead at startup doesn't creep in, or that musl-specific QoI guarantees are preserved (such as certain interfaces not taking superlinear time or being async-signal-safe even when not required by POSIX). As to how testing relates to this release thread, I think development of further major tests is outside the realm of the immediate sort of release priorities I was asking about. But it's something I've been wanting to pursue again for a long time, and I'd be quite happy to find contributors interested in working on it. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.