[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Rethinking remote testing

From: Jacob Bachmeyer
Subject: Re: Rethinking remote testing
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 19:14:52 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20090807 MultiZilla/ SeaMonkey/1.1.17 Mnenhy/

Ben Elliston wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 06:19:39PM -0600, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
The recent and ongoing discussion over is_remote (and why is that
the only is* predicate with an underscore in the name?) and its
less-than-entirely-accurate implementation started me thinking about
the topic.  What would be a better way to handle remote testing?

I wondered about that, too. I will add an isremote proc that wraps
is_remote. We can then try and depreciate is_remote over the

Please hold off doing that -- it may be necessary for isremote to test different conditions and is_remote may need to be kept as is for compatibility until it is removed. If is_remote is deprecated now, we could have problems later. Better for testsuites to migrate to a new name with new (and correct) semantics than to change the name while keeping the broken semantics we have now.

-- Jacob

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]