Re: Re[2]: Kernel testing

Dave Wreski (
Sat, 12 Apr 1997 13:49:24 -0400 (EDT)

On Sat, 12 Apr 1997, Seth M. Landsman wrote:
> > I think that unless we come up with some ideas on how to implement this,
> > we should drop it.
> Implementation isn't difficult. Read my idea about sticking
> something in the rc.M file ...

This isn't what I meant. I meant just how are you going to write the
application itself? I'm certatinly not deterring you from doing this, and
it is a good idea whether it is done to work remotely or locally.

> Of course the testing suite will only be used by people who know
> that they are using it, know what is being used and know what might
> happen. I think it would be a wonderful idea to include some of the minor
> tests, such as ensure system calls do what they should be doing as part of
> the kernel suite (make test idea), but the stress tests are something
> different.

I would expect it to be treated as an rpm that someone could download and
install, not something we would hide from them. I would think a nice way
to do it would be to use this program when you think you have a bug, or
your kernel crashes..

Please, if this continues take it offline, before the developers get