On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 09:18:25PM +0100, Daniel Willmann wrote: > you're right. I was trying to first record the status quo so you can see > the behaviour changes as the issue is fixed. > > Holger was quite fond of this in the recent lapdm fixes, but it probably > makes less sense here. Holger, any preferences how I should handle this? > Move the test to the end, have a failing test, ..?
The question is if you want to have a known issue in new code or not. What is the impact for the end-user/NITB? How will this fail? Is this a step backward compared to the extensions by BSD/Linux? holger
