Need input on preference on location of 3rd party tests vs FreeBSD tests

[Garrett Cooper]

On Jul 18, 2014, at 7:45 AM, Alan Somers <asomers at freebsd.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:11 AM, Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>   One of the things that I've done on my fork of FreeBSD is I've imported ATF test suites from NetBSD and I have integrated existing test suites from freebsd's tools/regression tree into Kyua as well. Due to the size and difference in test content/coverage, I pulled lib/libc and lib/msun from bother sources and integrated them into Kyua. What I did was I put the netbsd testcases into the tests/ subdirectory and put the FreeBSD test suites into a tests/legacy subdirectory. The goal was that the legacy directory would eventually be converted over to atf testcases and then could be removed once the conversion was complete.
>>   I'm not sure if this scheme makes sense though. Does anyone have a preference as to whether or not this makes sense?
>> Thanks!
>> -Garrett
> 
> 
> I don't understand.  What did you put in tests/legacy?

The tests from tools/regression. tests/ contains the tests from NetBSD.

>  If you're just
> copying from tools/regression, why not simply leave them in place
> until you convert them to ATF?

I moved the files over into their respective locations to avoid having to change build machinery at the top level, but you bring up a valid concern. These pieces are the exception, not the norm, so would it make more sense to leave them be, hook the directories into the build somehow, then move them over to their respective spots once they’ve been converted over?

I was trying to keep things relatively pristine when dealing with the NetBSD testcases as well so it would be clearer which was “our’s” and what was “their’s”, mostly because the code isn’t checked into a vendor tree as I don’t have a commit bit and no one else with a commit bit has done it yet.

Thanks!
-Garrett