hi, anonym wrote (13 Nov 2012 13:01:41 GMT) : > 03/11/12 09:55, intrigeri wrote: >>> that starts on the guest when the boot parameter >>> "autotest_never_use_me" is present on the kernel cmdline. >> >> "autotest_never_use_me" looks to me like "(speaking to) autotest: >> never use me". What about "backdoor_for_autotest"?
> I'm not sure I want to mention the word "backdoor". Sure, I do it in the > remote shell server script, but then it's mentioned in a context where > sane people should have no reason to be worried. Why should the boot parameter name be mentioned in contexts where this does not apply? (Not a rhetorical question.) >>> Saving/restoring VM snapshots >>> ============================= >>> [...] >> >> For both features, to reply on the 'how "ethical" they are in the >> context of test-driven development' topic, I'd need a concrete example >> of how this would be used in practice. > I'm sure there are specific/concrete situations where this is not a good > idea. I was more interested if you saw any fundamental flaws with this > approach since it's a step away from black box testing (same applies to > the remote shell). Sorry, I'm not in a mood to think about fundamental flaws without examples. Anyhow, I'll try to contribute a bit, hoping that helps. So, I think that: 1. There are serious shortcomings that come with these features. Every time one cheats and uses them, one should know what they are actually *not* testing, and think if/how that could be tested. 2. Trying at all costs to totally avoid to use these features is probably not a good use of our time. 3. Generally, I like to exercise systems under test at different levels, and the remote shell feature is probably the most efficient way to zoom-in and run something like "unit tests". This may not totally replace more zoomed-out, behavioral testing, though. That's all I feel I can answer, on a general level. I'd rather be pointed to cases when it looks much easier or even needed to resort to such hacks, and then, discuss whether that is acceptable on a case by case basis. But that may happen later, once actual reasons to use these features arise. Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc _______________________________________________ tails-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
