How to thoroughly test the LFS?
mingz at ele.uri.edu
Wed May 11 20:39:29 PDT 2005
On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 08:56 +0530, Chakkaradeep C C wrote:
> Hi all,
> here is my view,once u compile Binutils,Gcc,Glibc and perform a 'make
> check' try to post ur Test Summary to the appropiate mailing list,not
> in lfs mailining list,rather if u have binutils test summary use
> binutils mailing list.............and ask whether ur summary report is
> apt for ur configuration (i586 or i686). You will sure get response
> and if at all any error is there,u would be notified!......
thx! yes, i think this is a pretty good QA. :P at least we are
approaching the right point.
> hope this helps u......
> with regards,
> On 5/10/05, Ming Zhang <mingz at ele.uri.edu> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 17:00 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> > > Ming Zhang wrote:
> > > > ok, then let us reduce the range. how to verify the basic packages like
> > > > binutils, glibc and gcc is correct? or 90% correct? as long as the test
> > > > like "make check" or "make test" passed?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Just because a package builds and passes all the tests doesn't tell you that it won't
> > i guess so. so this is why i am worrying about.
> > > cause problems. The only way to know for sure is to build what you want and fix
> > > whatever issues you come across as you go.
> > the problem is who is the black sheep? when a php running in apache get
> > error, i donot know is php, or apache, or configuration, or glibc or
> > kernel... cause the error. :P
> > so i am thinking that i am doing some people RH or Suse hired to do.
> > QA. :P
> > > Life's like a box of chocolates,
> > > you never know what you're going to get
> > en. i like this, but i do not want to be treated like this at this
> > time. :P maybe i have no choice. :)
> > thx
> > ming
> > BodyID:390421.2.n.logpart (stored separately)
> > --
> > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
> > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
> > Unsubscribe: See the above information page
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the lfs-support