You are correct. LTP isn't trying to be any kind of "compliance" test.
We're just trying to exercise and stress the Linux kernel to find bugs
and guard against regressions.
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 04:08:44PM -0800, Dan Kegel wrote:
> I urge you to consider ways in which you could work within the
> framework of the LTP to meet both your goals and the LTP's goals.
> They may be more in synch than you originally thought!
I don't think LTP's "framework[1]" is going to help Geoff complete his
project. Geoff already created a SourceForge site. As part of the
LTP, I probably would have given him a separate CVS module and a mailing
list. I think he has everything he needs to get started already.
That being said, if Geoff does want his Open POSIX test suite to be part
of the LTP, we'll gladly accomodate him.
[1] By framework I think you mean logistical, not libraries. I think
our test libraries have some things he might like. I just recommend
cleaning them up before using them.
-- Nate Straz nstraz@sgi.com sgi, inc http://www.sgi.com/ Linux Test Project http://ltp.sf.net/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/