[SAMBA4] we should create just one test environment
abartlet at samba.org
Mon Apr 30 06:47:52 GMT 2007
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 09:03 +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > Of late, we gained the ability to run multiple test environments, in
> > Samba4. For many purposes (such as Windows testing), it perhaps makes
> > sense to say 'this is entirely distinct from the rest', but otherwise, I
> > wonder if we should instead just create a single, fuller test
> > environment.
> > This way, if we want to reproduce any test, we just start 'make
> > testevn', and don't have to figure out which testevn we want.
> > Similarly, we always have a DC or two, and a member server running, and
> > you just target the tests at the appropriate hosts.
> - -1
> Nothing prevents test environments for guaranteeing both a dc and two
> members will be up, for example.
I'm asking that that be the default, that we create exactly one test
environment for the vast majority of the tests we run.
> If we have just one test network (with lots of hosts), then for example
> "make test TESTS=TALLOC" will be very slow, whereas it is very fast at
> the moment (doesn't need to do any provisioning). Same goes for tests
> that only require a dc.
Sure, I think that the 'none' environment makes perfect sense. That
doesn't change my position.
> Also, the current code makes it very easy to add support for other
> targets (Samba3, for example) that don't support all test environments
> Perhaps you would simply like to make sure that all test environments
> are set up in 'make testenv' ?
No, then the tests will constantly differ from the environment in which
they are normally run, even worse than the current situation.
I'm afraid that the selftest setup is becoming too complex to reproduce
- I want to be able to easily reproduce any failure in 'make
testenv' (which you will recall is my primary work tool), without first
wondering 'oh, what environment did it declare, what environment did it
get, and what environment do I have now'.
It doesn't seem too much of a price to always have a simple network
running, that contains the DC (or 2), and member servers. Then we can
be very consistent in how our tests run, and are debugged.
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc. http://redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20070430/329596b2/attachment.bin
More information about the samba-technical