Bryan J. Smith wrote: > As far as everything else, I think it's moot to argue. > Testing on paths in Linux is like testing dates for > history. It doesn't test anything about context and > application. > > The objectives should remove the path contexts, or at > least note that only xdm is under /etc/X11/xdm for > XFree86/Xorg. Questions should focus elsewhere.
Configuration file path is only one of the things that may vary between releases and distributions. Commands and their arguments will change over time, and that is something we do test on. We are not even talking about infrastructure: devfs vs udev, XFree86 vs X.org (Debian 3.1 aka sarge, released on June 2005, shipped with XFree86), etc. We cannot abstract all of this, and as such have to decide at some point what we are testing and what we are not. What I am advocating for is defining a known quantity to test on. -- Etienne Goyer 0x3106BCC2 "For Bruce Schneier, SHA-1 is merely a compression algorithm." http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/164
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list lpi-examdev@lpi.org http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
