Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 07:30:46 +0100 From: Peter Holm <peter@holm.cc> To: Julio Merino <jmmv@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" <freebsd-testing@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: My first ATF test Message-ID: <20140303063046.GB70172@x2.osted.lan> In-Reply-To: <CAFY7cWDjyqf5%2BQn9YfdG4qOQ-bMpbEj7Our3o=X%2B7cRqMATCUw@mail.gmail.com> References: <20140225161129.GA59741@x2.osted.lan> <CAFY7cWDjyqf5%2BQn9YfdG4qOQ-bMpbEj7Our3o=X%2B7cRqMATCUw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 03:44:14PM -0500, Julio Merino wrote: > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Peter Holm <peter@holm.cc> wrote: > > In order to understand how ATF works I wrote a small test so I had > > something to work with: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~pho/kern_descrip_test.diff > > Did I get it right? > > Hello Peter, > > Looks good to me. > > One suggestion: that comment with the explanation for dup2_r234131 > would be much better represented either as 1) a more descriptive test > case name or 2) a test case description ("descr" metadata property). > The revision number means nothing to readers. People running the test > suite won't see the comment at all, but they will see the test case > name all the time and they may see the description depending on the > reporting format. > > For example, dup2__ebadf_when_2nd_arg_out_of_range would clearly > explain what this is. You could later put the revision number in the > "descr" property with a textual explanation if so desired. > > Cheers Yes, I see your point. I'll fix this. -- Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140303063046.GB70172>