Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.aix:48724 comp.unix.bsd:15546 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:7717 comp.unix.solaris:28196 comp.unix.unixware:15092 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!koriel!newsworthy.West.Sun.COM!abyss.West.Sun.COM!salaam!sherif From: sherif@salaam.West.Sun.COM (K. M. Sherif) Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.unixware Subject: Re: Unix for PC Date: 11 Dec 1994 17:01:14 GMT Organization: SunSoft, Los Angeles Lines: 46 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <3cfb8q$bj@abyss.West.Sun.COM> References: <199411210319.TAA18133@nic.cerf.net> <3c8aqi$l4i@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <3cale6$6ep@fido.asd.sgi.com> <3ccq23$mba@pdq.coe.montana.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: salaam.west.sun.com In article <3ccq23$mba@pdq.coe.montana.edu> nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes: >In article <3cale6$6ep@fido.asd.sgi.com>, >Larry McVoy <lm@slovax.engr.sgi.com> wrote: >>I wrote: >>: >I hate to burst your bubble, but I worked at Sun in the systems group for >>: >a few years (and then in the server group). They had *no* regression >>: >test other than the binaries that shipped with the OS. Since 5.x, >>: >they use the POSIX test suites but those (were) are pathetic and >>: >certainly don't cover everything. >> >>Nate Williams (nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu) wrote: >>: Then somebody should take the manager of that group out and shoot him. >>: Either that or his manager for giving unreasonable deadlines that can't >>: be met with decent testing. >> >>Until you've actually implemented a Unix regression test, don't be so >>naive. If it was just a matter of a dumbass manager, do you think they >>wouldn't have figured that out by now? > >It may be difficult to write, but it can't be any more difficult to >write than some of the features that are touted to be great in SUNos. >There is *NO* excuse for no testing whatsoever. >>Real testing is hard, hard, hard. Let me know when you have a solution. > >Even a 'make world' is better than nothing. Reducing the amount of >memory in the machine and running some pretty hefty scientific >applications on it. Yes, you won't find all the bugs but you'll >hopefully find some of the more obvious ones. Heck, get one of the >benchmark programs put out which stress tests lots of the systems and >run it for days on end. Even the lmbenchmarks are better than none. > > I was not working for Sun when Larry Mcvoy was So I cannot say what he meant by lack of testing From his followup post, I assume he had an idealistic view of *regression* testing. I have been working for Sun for almost two years. Every build of Solaris 2.4 was done on the previous day's binary on a 4 way or 8 way MP. More than 80% of the engineers' desktops ran abuild which was done within the last week. The file and home servers ran last week's build. Weekly builds had to go through 3 tiers of testing including 20 real world applications (large database, scientific, productivity apps) etc in addition to standard test suites. Regression tests used by ISVs were integrated into Solaris test suites. LADDIS and TPC benchmarks (among others) were run on each week's build. Sherif