Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.aix:48706 comp.unix.bsd:15541 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:7713 comp.unix.solaris:28175 comp.unix.unixware:15085 Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.unixware Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!decwrl!netcomsv!netcom.com!palowoda From: palowoda@netcom.com (Bob Palowoda) Subject: Re: Unix for PC Message-ID: <palowodaD0n2J1.3G5@netcom.com> Followup-To: comp.unix.aix,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.unixware Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] References: <199411210319.TAA18133@nic.cerf.net> <D0E32G.3x8@news.cern.ch> <MICHAELV.94Dec10124723@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> <3cd8fo$ns5@fido.asd.sgi.com> Distribution: inet Date: Sun, 11 Dec 1994 09:04:12 GMT Lines: 56 Larry McVoy (lm@slovax.engr.sgi.com) wrote: : Michael L. VanLoon (michaelv@MindBender.HeadCandy.com) wrote: : : In article <3c81c7$h1o@fido.asd.sgi.com> lm@fubar (Larry McVoy) writes: : : Nate Williams (nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu) wrote: : : : C'mon Dan. Commercial OS software testing is completely different than : : : free software testing in general. The reason Linux and FreeBSD have : : I hate to burst your bubble, but I worked at Sun in the systems group for : : a few years (and then in the server group). They had *no* regression : : test other than the binaries that shipped with the OS. Since 5.x, : : they use the POSIX test suites but those (were) are pathetic and : : certainly don't cover everything. : : I've worked with a certain very large software company and it is not : : done like this at all. They do extensive testing constantly during : : the development cycle, before anyone outside the company even sees it. : I think you are misunderstanding the point. Certainly Sun, and every : other big or small company, will run the new release internally before : shipping it and will "test" that the binaries "work". Michael may not have been aware of all the different levels of testing that goes on at Sun. Just to say they use POSIX is gross understatement. The XPG4 branding is more terse than POSIX in that respect. There numerous regression tests that occur within Sun which includes performance monitoring. Well I can't comment on the details of of the results for obvious reasons I will say that Sun has put enomous resources into the quality 2.4 and continues with 2.5. The final judgements come as each successive release hits the public. These views of the "quality" or "performance" change very slow and hopefully in the right direction. As for the general preception of testing differences that occur between the BSD group and Linux. I think the BSD groups are more oganized and pragmatic in their approach to testing, conformance to standards and documentation. Linux on the other hand seems mixed as they define a new standard of Unix kicking and screaming everytime someone mentions BSD networking or elf support etc. Their seems to be some sort of identity image with Linux. It's this chaotic state that makes it difficult to test and support Lunix. I'm not saying Linux is a bad implementation of Unix. After reading alot of the HOWTO's and keeping up on the Linux admin and help groups there seems to be pockets of collectively organizing and test the releases. Linux 2.0 will be interesting. Boy this thread went into 5 directions all at once. ---Bob Std Disclaimer: The above is only my opinion. -- +--------------------------------------------------------+ | palowoda@fiver.sns.com http://fiver.sns.com/~palowoda/ | | Solaris x86 Corner http://fiver.sns.com/ | +--------------------------------------------------------+