From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1051 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2006 02:45:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 1044 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Mar 2006 02:45:50 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Mar 2006 02:45:48 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k292jkSY027735 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:45:46 -0500 Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k292jk117292; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:45:46 -0500 Received: from touchme.toronto.redhat.com (IDENT:postfix@touchme.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.9]) by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k292jjXN030107; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:45:45 -0500 Received: from ton.toronto.redhat.com (ton.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.15]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B01768001FF; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:45:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ton.toronto.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ton.toronto.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k292jjZf003624; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:45:45 -0500 Received: (from fche@localhost) by ton.toronto.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id k292jjKa003623; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:45:45 -0500 Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 02:45:00 -0000 From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" To: William Cohen Cc: systemtap@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [Patch]patch for some systemtap test cases failure Message-ID: <20060309024545.GB2632@redhat.com> References: <440BF7BC.7010001@intel.com> <440EF403.8080409@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <440EF403.8080409@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q1/txt/msg00741.txt.bz2 Hi - wcohen wrote: > What is the logic of making the pass-5 tests being run [against] > *installed* copy of systemtap which the pass-[1234] tests are only > run against the build tree? The pass-5 tests best simulate real usage. The pass-[1-4] tests are tantamount to unit tests, which are easily (and I hope frequently) run within unprivileged build sessions. > It seems logical to make it possible to be able to run that > pass-[1234] tests against installed systemtap also. I suppose one could, but it's redundant. Chances are that any systemtap binary that was installed will already have had the build-time test suite run against it. - FChE