On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 5:57 AM, Subrata Modak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Garrett, > > Any changes for LTP Ballista ? > > Regards-- > Subrata > > On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 16:19 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Subrata Modak >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 21:42 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: >> >> Hi Garrett, >> >> >> >> On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 04:12 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> >> > So, as I said earlier I was going to repost Ballista under another >> >> > project name up on SF thanks to the PI's blessings, so here's the >> >> > placeholder: >> >> > >> >> > http://sf.net/projects/catepault/ (haven't posted the source files yet) >> >> >> >> Good to see that you have come up with the rewrite so fast. >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Catepault so far does not differ from Ballista, apart from the fact >> >> > that I rewrote the Makefiles to support cross-compilation, simplify >> >> > logic, and to properly clean all binary targets (YAY!). >> >> > >> >> > I'm going to try pushing some of the platform dependent items from >> >> > "configure" (a glorified Perl script) to the actual C++ files, or >> >> > their respective headers, to get rid of the Perl dependency in the >> >> > system for compilation. This will be a win-win (IMO) as it will allow >> >> > more restricted embedded environments to compile the sources for >> >> > Catepault without having an unnecessary Perl interpreter to just fill >> >> > in the platform dependent API gaps. >> >> > >> >> >> >> How do you plan this to handle in LTP ? Do you want to remove the folder >> >> ballista completely and replace with new catepault ? >> > >> > Garrett, >> > >> > Would you like to convey your Idea here ? >> > >> > Regards-- >> > Subrata >> > >> >> >> >> Regards-- >> >> Subrata >> >> >> >> > Will keep you guys posted as things transpire. >> >> > >> >> > Cheers, >> >> > -Garrett >> >> > >> >> Well, quite frankly it would be silly to have Ballista and Catepault >> both in the LTP repository, as they provide basically the same >> purpose, minus Ballista being executable on the target machine whereas >> Catepault can only be executed on the build host. >> >> Plus Catepault will do the right thing by cleaning itself properly :D. >> -Garrett
It's in my backlog, which is pretty long right now. Our group at Cisco has been really bad in terms getting automated testing infrastructure out the door, due to lack of resources, so until these issues get worked out I'm stuck with manually testing things, which is both time consuming and error prone (test engineers are required for commit -- for anything, as well as release/integration validation :(..). Thankfully help is on the horizon, but it's still ~1 month away. FWIW, LTP on the mips architecture introduces some interesting issues that I'll need to discuss with you guys later, and adds to support overhead -- then again the image we're working with is from April, so I'm almost positive some bugfixes have been made that address issues that I see on a regular release basis. -Garrett ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
