asomers at freebsd.org
Fri Apr 4 19:19:55 UTC 2014
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Julio Merino <jmmv at freebsd.org> wrote:
> Just a couple of minor comments:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:07:04AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> (Just to fill in some context on some of the items here)
>> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Alan Somers <asomers at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> > lib/libc/tests/net/Makefile has one tested comment out with the
>> > comment "test uses rump". Would it be possible instead to leave the
>> > test in the build, but put "require.progs rump_server" in the relevant
>> > test cases' heads?
>> Probably carryover from NetBSD that should be pushed back to NetBSD.
> Why? rump is "standard" in NetBSD so that's probably not going to fly.
> It'd be like saying "require.progs = ls".
I don't know about NetBSD, but FreeBSD has a lot of optional stuff in
base that's compiled in by default. For example, the entire Bluetooth
stack can be disabled by WITHOUT_BLUETOOTH=yes make buildworld. At
$WORK, I disabled a whole bunch of stuff that way to slim down our
product's image. A deeply embedded system, I'm sure, would disable
even more. If rump can be disabled in a NetBSD build, then it would
be worthwhile for rump-based ATF tests to identify themselves via
More information about the freebsd-testing