On Aug 17, 10:28am in "Re: LSB.fhs failure ", Anthony Towns wrote: > It still seems a bit meaningless to have lots of test cases when there's > not even a prototypical working product (ie, some .lsb packages that > can be installed on some distro), though. > Without tests we won't know (a) whether the specifications are useable/correct or (b) whether implementations implement the specifications. In general tests provide a useful measure of the quality of a specification, embodying the requirements in code that can be run and produce measureable results. regards Andrew
- LSB.fhs failure digest for Debian Sample Implementation Matt Taggart
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for Debian Sample Implement... Andrew Josey
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for Debian Sample Imple... M. Drew Streib
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for Debian Sample I... Andrew Josey
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for Debian Samp... Anthony Towns
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for Debian... Andrew Josey
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for De... Anthony Towns
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest fo... Andrew Josey
- sendmail requirements (was Re: LSB.f... Andrew Josey
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for Debian Sample Imple... Matt Taggart
- Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for Debian Sample I... Andrew Josey
- X11R6 symlink (was Re: LSB.fhs failure digest for ... Andrew Josey
