From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 22 10:41:05 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B18371065670; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 10:41:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from igloo.linux.gr (igloo.linux.gr [62.1.205.36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03FD68FC1E; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 10:41:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Status: No X-Hellug-MailScanner-From: keramida@ceid.upatras.gr X-Hellug-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-2.9, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, BAYES_00 -1.90) X-Hellug-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Hellug-MailScanner-ID: oBMAQsx6006736 Received: from gkeramidas-glaptop.linux.gr ([74.125.57.36]) (authenticated bits=0) by igloo.linux.gr (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.4) with ESMTP id oBMAQsx6006736 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:27:00 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Erik Cederstrand , Ulrich =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sp=F6rle?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?in?= References: <201012211500.16131.jhb@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 11:26:53 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Erik Cederstrand's message of "Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:21:56 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Cc: mdf@freebsd.org, Robert Watson , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Schedule for releases X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 10:41:05 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:21:56 +0100, Erik Cederstrand wrote: >Den 21/12/2010 kl. 23.28 skrev Robert Watson: >> Looking at 7.x, I'm struck by how much it has slowed down. There's a >> significant user community, but not a significant developer community. > > Which pretty much sums up a dilemma in the development of FreeBSD, I > think. Developers want users to try out their new shiny stuff, but > users don't want to spend time upgrading. > > I think one of many things that would be great to do is to improve the > usability and coverage of the regression tests. This would take at > least some of the burden off developers who want to MFC their work. We > already have the tinderboxes, Coverity and Clang Static Analyzer, but > apart from pho's stress tests we don't have any automated runtime > testing (as far as I know). Having a good automated testing suite is something that's been bugging me for a while. We might have one in early 2011 though. I've recently finished porting ATF from NetBSD to stable/8 and uploaded most of the work at bitbucket: https://bitbucket.org/keramida/atf-stable8/ Most of the atf-xxx tools work 'ok', but there are still a few rough edges to think about and patch into the ATF tools. Then I'm going forward to /head during the next couple of weeks. During the first 2-3 months of 2011, I'll be able to bring over most of the automated tests from NetBSD and then write a few more for our own code. Having a 'unified' approach to testing, e.g. the ability to patch usr.bin/foo/Makefile and add something like: TESTS?= tests/foo_startup \ tests/foo_socket \ tests/foo_stuff is something I've been talking about with uqs@. I'll definitely feel really awesome if we can run, for example, something like: cd /usr/src && make test to generate a nice, automated test report for the entire src/ codebase. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk0R0m0ACgkQ1g+UGjGGA7YkWgCfUuTg4WdPDTd0bQlVRztQbB1h emsAn1pu9XzSU4YppFOyj/WpMIYiULjj =A/re -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--