On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 1:33 PM, David Krakov<[email protected]> wrote: > Table can be updated only manually - documenting differences between > POSIX and busybox behaviour on options that do exist. > It can serve as a mini-TODO file. > The only easy way I see to go with tests is to check for full > compliance by comparing with GNU (which is not strictly compliant > itself). > > I ran the test suite - there are some FAILs: > * Is it up to date?
Yes. Mostly. Tests get added from time to time, and I try to make sure there are at least no regressions against older versions. Some FAILs are real bugs. (Want to fix some? ;) Others may be false positives. Most of tests assume allyesconfig and will FAIL on less full configs. > * I've seen some tests compare with GNU tools output - does it > require a specific version of GNU utilities? Those tests are bad. For one, on my system it ends up comparing busybox applet in build tree with ... busybox installed in /bin! Not very useful :) Tests are better to compare against known-good output, not the output of "system" utilities with the same name. > Though there are tests that can be used for this objective, the test > suite is lacking a simple way to mark existing tests with some kind of > a flag like POSIXTEST. How do you propose to do that? I don't understand. I do not see why we would want to test specifically POSIX compliance only. We want to test "correctness". What is "correct" depends on applet. For some, it's POSIX compliance. For others, it's "upstream compliance" (e.g. modprobe). Some applets are busybox-specific (mdev), thus we decide ourself what we want to test for. -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
