Re: Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit: The future of The GNU C Library.

[Thomas Schwinge <thomas at codesourcery dot com>]

Hi!

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 22:44:13 -0600, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 03/27/2012 09:23 PM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Carlos O'Donell
> > <carlos@systemhalted.org>  wrote:
> >> Anything goes, I'm looking to create a grab-bag of ideas from the
> >> community including such crazy things as:
> >>
> >
> > How about a dejagnu (or equivalent) testsuite? If dejagnu is ok, I can
> > work on porting the current test cases into something similar to
> > gcc/gdb.
> dejagnu is dreadful; there's got to be a better designed & implemented 
> testing harness we can use.  Improving testing would be a big step 
> forward, but not with dejagnu, please.

There is one point in favor of DejaGnu: all the other GNU toolchain
components are using it, thus a bunch of infrastructure and know-how
already exists (see Siddhesh's offer).  Open question (and I'm
undecided): is that argument enough to in fact *prefer* DejaGnu over
something else?


In context of the GNU Hurd, I once started collecting pointers regarding
unit testing (but didn't do more work on that yet):
<http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/open_issues/unit_testing.html>.
Perhaps something of these is helpful for glibc?


GrÃÃe,
 Thomas

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature