On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 19:14 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote:
> Hi Paul/James,
> 
> On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 20:46 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 August 2008 7:18:22 pm James Morris wrote:
> > > On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Subrata Modak wrote:
> > > > Hi James,
> > > >
> > > > As i have talked to the SE-Linux mini summit during OLS 2008,
> > > > regarding testing all components of LSM, i would like to know if
> > > > you would like to share testing the AUDIT LSM in kernel. If
> > > > possible i would like to get them integrated inside LTP under
> > > > GPLv2. Let me know what you think about this.
> > >
> > > Sounds like a good idea.  Who is going to do what?
> > 
> > I agree, testing is always good.  That said I'm not sure how much I will 
> > be able to help in the near future.  We here at HP did release some 
> > audit tests from our recent Common Criteria certifications on 
> > SourceForge[1] which may or may-not be helpful.  The don't utilize the 
> > LTP framework but they may provide some test development ideas.
> 
> It is perfectly Ok, if some tests do not obey the LTP framework, but
> they still exist inside LTP. You can see that for yourself here:
> 
> http://ltp.cvs.sourceforge.net/ltp/ltp/testcases/,
> 
> While testcases like open_posix, open_hpi, kdump, ballista, pounder21,
> realtime, etc do not follow LTP framework. Hence during LTP releases,
> these are also released as separate tarballs apart from being part of
> the main release tarball as well. So, people who use all the tests will
> download the main release, others do selective downloads.
> 
> What you see inside the
> http://ltp.cvs.sourceforge.net/ltp/ltp/testcases/kernel/, sub directory
> are the actual test cases which follow the LTP framework. In fact if
> there are tests which just return 0/non-zero on PASS/FAIL is a suitable
> candidate for initial inclusion into absolute LTP framework.
> 
> Even during the last FOSS 2007 meeting, i had a talk with James and he
> said that HP has released Common Criteria certifications. I was
> wondering that i had done only for IBM´s and SGI´s Common Criteria
> Certification testsuite release, not for HP:
> 
> https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=3382,
> 
> So, wouldn´t it be better to put audit-test somewhere here:
> http://ltp.cvs.sourceforge.net/ltp/ltp/testcases/,
> 
> or, more better here:
> http://ltp.cvs.sourceforge.net/ltp/ltp/testcases/kernel/security/,
> 
> If you give me a thumbsup for this, initially i would request a DCO
> signoff mail (my legal obligations) from you to ltp-list. Nexttime
> onwards, whenever you update your releases in
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/audit-test, i can automatically pull
> the diff inside LTP. Do you think that this can be a nice beginning ?

I forgot to mention another advantage. When this is in put in LTP, the
scope of usage of audit-test will increase, and hence you can expect
more reviews/contributions.

Regards--
Subrata

> 
> Regards--
> Subrata
> 
> > 
> > [1] http://sourceforge.net/projects/audit-test
> > 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Reply via email to