> LSB has taken some criticism for the tests being too hard to run and too > hard to interpret. It's partly true as Denis notes above, but good > testing is not simple, and LSB had a fair bit of contributed code which > came with its own testing methods, you do what you can. Still, I feel > like productive collaboration with upstreams could make tests that work > for abi/api stability both in the upstream's environment and still be > usable in the LSB test environment. The "market" for such things is > highlighted in this notice: > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2015-September/001152.html > > Look in particular at reference [3] and look for the changed line 57.
The value of the tests isn't just the LSB compliance though - they find an awful lot of screwups, accidental compatibility breaks and the like even if you are not trying to be LSB. _______________________________________________ lsb-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss
