[lsb-discuss] Accessibility testing in LSB

Stew Benedict stewb at linux-foundation.org
Mon May 26 13:07:38 PDT 2008


On Mon, 26 May 2008, Mark Doffman wrote:

> Stew Benedict wrote:
> > I think I worked on these most recently, packaging them up to a point 
> > where they theoretically could become part of the test suite.
> > 
> > Part of the issue in these tests is that I haven't been able to compile 
> > them with lsbcc (too many dependencies not yet in LSB). They also require 
> > a fair amount of GNOME'ish infrastructure installed on the test platform 
> > to be able to run the tests.
> > 
> > I had also thought the accessibility workgroup felt these were basically 
> > prototype tests, and they wanted to do something more/else?
> > 
> 
> I think your right, the accessibility workgroup would like to do more, 
> and perhaps something different. In the last linux foundation 
> accessibility conference call it was mentioned a few times. One of the 
> options was to start from scratch on these tests using the python client 
> bindings to AT-SPI. Another was simply to extend the existing tests for 
> more coverage.
> 
> Whats the rules regarding building LSB tests with lsbcc? Will the tests 
> have to do so before they can be considered part of the LSB test suite? 
> Is it acceptable to create python tests?
> 

I don't know that it's a rule per say, but it is preferred. We've seen 
portability issues with the other tests that we can better control by 
using lsbcc. (On powerpc we had apps compiled on SLES10, our build 
platform, that would not run on Debian). We've only in the last year 
gotten all our other packages so they are compiled with lsbcc.

Yes, python is acceptable, and subset of python/modules went into LSB as 
of 3.2:

http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Languages/LSB-Languages/book1.html

Same methodology would apply as with lsbcc compile, if it's not specified, 
you'd need to bundle whatever python modules your test might need in the 
test (if you wanted the test suite to be compliant). An alternative would 
be to rely on the lsb-python package from our application-battery, but I 
think making the app(s) compliant would be preferred.

It's not uncommon for a test to require something not required by LSB for 
the purpose of testing, but we try to avoid it as much as possible.

I usually try to make the Accessibility calls to help where I can in any 
testing issues, but missed the recent calls. I'll try to get back on track 
with that.

-- 
Stew Benedict
The Linux Foundation



More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list