[lsb-discuss] ISP RAS framework issues/feedback/questions

Harring, BrianX D brianx.d.harring at intel.com
Tue Aug 1 20:53:50 PDT 2006

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lsb-discuss-bounces at lists.freestandards.org [mailto:lsb-discuss-
> bounces at lists.freestandards.org] On Behalf Of Denis Markovtsev
> Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 8:15 AM
> To: Banginwar, Rajesh; lsb-discuss at lists.freestandards.org
> Subject: Re: [lsb-discuss] ISP RAS framework issues/feedback/questions

<snip, regarding marshalling>
> b)  This is a very good question. Indeed, usually formal
> and
> methods have problems with complex data, pointers and so on.
> our framework works well here. It is not necessary to transfer big
> back and fourth in all cases. If an internal structure of an object is
> interesting for us, we don't transfer it and work only with pointers
> the
> object. But if we want to check the internal state of the object we
> to
> implement marshalling/unmarshalling. Please, note that
> marshalling/unmarshalling is used only along with the remote agent. So
> is
> not an indispensable part of our framework because it is possible to
> tests that do not use the agent.

If you're not relying on remote, how would it protect itself against
segfaults?  Assume the change would be shifting over to fork'ing prior
to the run?


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list