Re: Re[2]: Kernel testing

Dave Wreski (tel1dvw@is.ups.com)
Sat, 12 Apr 1997 00:12:27 -0400 (EDT)

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info.

--IMA.Boundary.506008068
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.93.970411234835.1426F@butthead>
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part

> > That it is unnecesarily complex, and you can only report success, anyway.
> > If it crashes, you can't expect that machine to report it :-).
> > [You need human beings in this process...]
>
> We could use an ACK type of system. If we have an identical test

I think that unless we come up with some ideas on how to implement this,
we should drop it.

1. How are we going to implement issues like timings? Think about the
recent TCP-stall problem for one.

2. According to this ACK scheme, how are we to tell how long something
should take before giving up? Different times for different boxes?

3. Isn't security an issue? Do you think we will be able to provide
kernel-level control and have some sort of secure environment, so we don't
hear another one of McAffee's "Linux's first virus!" messages?

I could go on. I don't think the developers will go for such an idea.
Show us some code, then maybe they will listen.

Dave

--IMA.Boundary.506008068--