Preparing for the next release: call for testing

[Mike Frysinger]

On 02 Mar 2015 23:05, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 12:42:45AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> [...]
> > vFAIL: test; ppc/32-bit/MSB linux-3.12.20-gentoo kernel-headers-3.13.0 glibc-2.21 gcc-4.8.4
> >              kernel bug w/ipc
> > vFAIL: test; sparc/32-bit/MSB linux-3.17.2 kernel-headers-3.13.0 glibc-2.19 gcc-4.7.3
> >              kernel bug w/ipc
> 
> Is there any use in failing ipc_sem.test because of kernel bugs?
> strace tests are primarily for catching our bugs, not the kernel ones.

if we could dynamic XFAIL, that'd be best, but we can't.  i picked ERROR as that
seemed like the next appropriate one.  it does mean `make check` fails, but that
was the expectation.  if we want to not have `make check` fall down due to
issues outside of our control (like kernel bugs), then SKIP Is our only choice.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.strace.io/pipermail/strace-devel/attachments/20150302/39ecb7cc/attachment.bin>