[lsb-discuss] ALSA testing != 0

Denis Silakov silakov at ispras.ru
Wed Apr 29 03:46:33 PDT 2009

Robert Schweikert wrote:
> During the F2F we bumped against the test coverage concern w.r.t. ALSA a
> few times. While the coverage is not stellar, it is also not as bad as
> we thought as the attached analysis shows.
> I am not sure how we track upstream testing within our coverage data.
> Further I made the assumption that the tests are valuable, i.e. more
> than "the interface exists and doesn't crash".

Well, we don't track upstream coverage itself; we only track coverage
for tests included in the certification suite.

A usual process is to adopt existing upstream tests (if any) in LSB test
suites - drop tests for non-LSB symbols, make the tests themselves LSB
compliant, etc..

(I guess Stew can say more about integration of upstream tests into LSB
test suite).

In general, it seems that we should investigate existing libasound tests
and try to use them.


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list