On 05/11/2010 02:51 PM, Mark Handley wrote: > On 11 May 2010 22:02, Ben Greear<[email protected]> wrote: >> On 05/11/2010 01:57 PM, Mark Handley wrote: >>> >>> I'm not worried about adding any features - my main wish list item is >>> that we get back to similar test coverage to previous releases, so >>> we're confident we know about any regressions that happened. >> >> So do you want me to backport the bgp test harness fixups and >> bgp code to fix the bugs I found before we release >> 1.7? I don't have a good way to test actual functionality of such >> backported code aside from the test harness, though the risk isn't >> too bad. >> >> Backporting code isn't the most fun thing to do in the world, >> but probably not too difficult, so I'll do it if you want. > > If you can do so, that would be ideal. Even though this is very much > an interim release, we do need coverage to ensure it's of adequate > quality and to see if anything else needs fixing. Buildbot certainly > indicates your tree has much better test coverage at the moment than > the sourceforge tree.
NOTE: This is a resend...first one didn't make it through the list because the attachment was too big. You can now find the patch at: http://www.candelatech.com/~greearb/misc/patches/xorp_bgp_harness_backport.patch 'scons check' passes as good as it does in xorp.ct, so I'm pushing this. If there are any suggestions for improvement I'll be happy to consider them. This patch: * Makes bgp compile with shared libraries. * Fixes up some utils and libxipc stuff to compile for the bgp harness. * Fixes bgp harness logic to work with new path layout. * Runs xorp bgp harness logic when 'scons check' is requested. * Fixes some BGP asserts I found in xorp.ct testing. Thanks, Ben > > - Mark -- Ben Greear <[email protected]> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com _______________________________________________ Xorp-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers
