[LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[Michal Simek]

Hi All,

I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.

Thanks,
Michal

-- 
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
PetaLogix - Linux Solutions for a Reconfigurable World
w: www.petalogix.com p: +61-7-30090663,+42-0-721842854 f: +61-7-30090663


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT 
is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet
the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & 
iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian 
Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com 
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[Subrata Modak]

On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 11:24 +0200, Michal Simek wrote: 
> Hi All,
> 
> I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.

I think we can probably ask somebody in this list as well.

Kumar,

You have any idea ?

Regards--
Subrata

> 
> Thanks,
> Michal
> 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT 
is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet
the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & 
iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian 
Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com 
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 390 bytes --]

On Thursday 28 May 2009 05:24:23 Michal Simek wrote:
> I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.

the Subject line doesnt really seem to line up with this question.  what 
exactly do you want to do and why do you think Kbuild is the solution ?  
saying "let's switch to Kbuild!" without any rhyme or reason sounds like a lot 
of work for no gain.
-mike

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 444 bytes --]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT 
is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet
the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & 
iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian 
Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com 

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 155 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[Michal Simek]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 28 May 2009 05:24:23 Michal Simek wrote:
>   
>> I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.
>>     
>
> the Subject line doesnt really seem to line up with this question.  what 
> exactly do you want to do and why do you think Kbuild is the solution ?  
> saying "let's switch to Kbuild!" without any rhyme or reason sounds like a lot 
> of work for no gain.
>   
I wanted to wrote two emails instead of one - that's why was there 2
different things.
1. disable compilation "verbose" mode and turn on it with V=1.
2. Move all binaries outside of LTP source code O=/path
3. I use only some parts of LTP for my testing and it will be good to
enable/disable just tests which you want to use.
4. If is possible clean all Makefiles

I don't have much experience with Kbuild I had just quick look. I looked
at uClinux distribution
(from blackfin repo - user folder) and there are called user apps
Makefile with make -C folder in loop.
Is it possible to easy compile many separates apps with any simpler
description.
I mean something like hostprogs-y += hello but not only for host programs.
Is it possible to use I don't know for example progs-y+=hello or any
similar?

Michal

> -mike
>   


-- 
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
PetaLogix - Linux Solutions for a Reconfigurable World
w: www.petalogix.com p: +61-7-30090663,+42-0-721842854 f: +61-7-30090663


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT 
is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet
the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & 
iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian 
Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com 
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1741 bytes --]

On Saturday 30 May 2009 10:28:48 Michal Simek wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Thursday 28 May 2009 05:24:23 Michal Simek wrote:
> >> I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.
> >
> > the Subject line doesnt really seem to line up with this question.  what
> > exactly do you want to do and why do you think Kbuild is the solution ?
> > saying "let's switch to Kbuild!" without any rhyme or reason sounds like
> > a lot of work for no gain.
>
> I wanted to wrote two emails instead of one - that's why was there 2
> different things.
> 1. disable compilation "verbose" mode and turn on it with V=1.

meh.  `make -s` seems to work fine enough for me.  most people arent reviewing 
the output for warnings and similar issues, so i dont really see much point of 
having quiet output in LTP.

> 2. Move all binaries outside of LTP source code O=/path

you mean out-of-tree compilation.  you can use lndir to get the same 
functionality, but it isnt really an optimal method.

> 3. I use only some parts of LTP for my testing and it will be good to
> enable/disable just tests which you want to use.

you can run `make` in only the dirs you care about.  how deep do you actually 
want to get ?  having Kconfig entries for every single test (i.e. 
kernel/syscalls/{getsid,pipe}0{1,2} .....) is crazy.

> 4. If is possible clean all Makefiles

dont really know what that means

> I don't have much experience with Kbuild I had just quick look.  I looked at
> uClinux distribution

the uClinux distro is really an example you should look at.  the kconfig comes 
from the kernel, but all of the Makefiles are custom done.  the features it 
has arent terribly relevant.
-mike

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 444 bytes --]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT 
is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet
the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & 
iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian 
Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com 

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 155 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[Michal Simek]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 30 May 2009 10:28:48 Michal Simek wrote:
>   
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thursday 28 May 2009 05:24:23 Michal Simek wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.
>>>>         
>>> the Subject line doesnt really seem to line up with this question.  what
>>> exactly do you want to do and why do you think Kbuild is the solution ?
>>> saying "let's switch to Kbuild!" without any rhyme or reason sounds like
>>> a lot of work for no gain.
>>>       
>> I wanted to wrote two emails instead of one - that's why was there 2
>> different things.
>> 1. disable compilation "verbose" mode and turn on it with V=1.
>>     
>
> meh.  `make -s` seems to work fine enough for me.  most people arent reviewing 
> the output for warnings and similar issues, so i dont really see much point of 
> having quiet output in LTP.
>   
People don't do it because that warnings are hidden in huge log. It will
be good to run
sparse too.
>   
>> 2. Move all binaries outside of LTP source code O=/path
>>     
>
> you mean out-of-tree compilation.  you can use lndir to get the same 
> functionality, but it isnt really an optimal method.
>
>   
>> 3. I use only some parts of LTP for my testing and it will be good to
>> enable/disable just tests which you want to use.
>>     
>
> you can run `make` in only the dirs you care about.  how deep do you actually 
> want to get ?  having Kconfig entries for every single test (i.e. 
> kernel/syscalls/{getsid,pipe}0{1,2} .....) is crazy.
>   
Yes, I agree that make no sense to add all syscalls test for example to
Kconfig but
I can imagine tests for noMMU as are currently wrote in Makefile. For
example will be good for all to know
why are some tests exclude for noMMU.
Maybe any handling for older glibc with missing some syscalls to prevent
build failure.
Setup global cflags and cross compiler.
If you look to runtest for testing description, make sense to me have
all that filenames as Kconfig option and
enable/disable that tests.

>   
>> 4. If is possible clean all Makefiles
>>     
>
> dont really know what that means
>   
this point depended on descriptions below. I think we talked about once
in past.

There are a lot of additions like CFLAGS, LDLIBS.
CFLAGS += -I../../../../include -Wall
LDLIBS += -L../../../../lib -lltp

I think that install and clean parts could be possible to clean too and
have Makefiles with
one or two lines  like  test-y +=test_name

Is it possible to do with Kbuild? That the same question as I had in
previous email.

>   
>> I don't have much experience with Kbuild I had just quick look.  I looked at
>> uClinux distribution
>>     
>
> the uClinux distro is really an example you should look at.  the kconfig comes 
> from the kernel, but all of the Makefiles are custom done.
yes, but for example in LTP we don't need to use many custom Makefiles
(There are some like ebizzy, boost, preempt-test and some others)
the rest are LTP specific Makefiles.

Michal

>   the features it 
> has arent terribly relevant.
> -mike
>   


-- 
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
PetaLogix - Linux Solutions for a Reconfigurable World
w: www.petalogix.com p: +61-7-30090663,+42-0-721842854 f: +61-7-30090663


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT 
is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet
the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & 
iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian 
Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com 
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3775 bytes --]

On Sunday 31 May 2009 15:27:47 Michal Simek wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Saturday 30 May 2009 10:28:48 Michal Simek wrote:
> >> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>> On Thursday 28 May 2009 05:24:23 Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>> I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.
> >>>
> >>> the Subject line doesnt really seem to line up with this question. 
> >>> what exactly do you want to do and why do you think Kbuild is the
> >>> solution ? saying "let's switch to Kbuild!" without any rhyme or reason
> >>> sounds like a lot of work for no gain.
> >>
> >> I wanted to wrote two emails instead of one - that's why was there 2
> >> different things.
> >> 1. disable compilation "verbose" mode and turn on it with V=1.
> >
> > meh.  `make -s` seems to work fine enough for me.  most people arent
> > reviewing the output for warnings and similar issues, so i dont really
> > see much point of having quiet output in LTP.
>
> People don't do it because that warnings are hidden in huge log. It will
> be good to run sparse too.

i dont think sparse is applicable.  it is largely geared towards the policies 
employed in the kernel.

> >> 2. Move all binaries outside of LTP source code O=/path
> >
> > you mean out-of-tree compilation.  you can use lndir to get the same
> > functionality, but it isnt really an optimal method.
> >
> >> 3. I use only some parts of LTP for my testing and it will be good to
> >> enable/disable just tests which you want to use.
> >
> > you can run `make` in only the dirs you care about.  how deep do you
> > actually want to get ?  having Kconfig entries for every single test
> > (i.e. kernel/syscalls/{getsid,pipe}0{1,2} .....) is crazy.
>
> Yes, I agree that make no sense to add all syscalls test for example to
> Kconfig but I can imagine tests for noMMU as are currently wrote in
> Makefile.

sounds a bit arbitrary.  you and i may be interested in nommu, but what about 
other classifications of things people are interested in ?  that'd lead to 
messy kbuild files where tests are arbitrary grouped and the resulting build 
system would be just as bad.

> For example will be good for all to know why are some tests exclude for
> noMMU.

i dont see how that's relevant to kbuild.  that info should be documented 
regardless in the test case itself.

> Maybe any handling for older glibc with missing some syscalls to prevent
> build failure.

that is already handled by autoconf/autoheader, plus kconfig/kbuild has no 
functionality at all to address these issues.

> Setup global cflags and cross compiler.

already handled by autoconf.  integrating into kconfig would be reinventing 
the wheel for no appreciable gain.

> If you look to runtest for testing description, make sense to me have
> all that filenames as Kconfig option and enable/disable that tests.

ive never used/looked at runtest, sorry

> >> 4. If is possible clean all Makefiles
> >
> > dont really know what that means
>
> this point depended on descriptions below. I think we talked about once
> in past.
>
> There are a lot of additions like CFLAGS, LDLIBS.
> CFLAGS += -I../../../../include -Wall
> LDLIBS += -L../../../../lib -lltp
>
> I think that install and clean parts could be possible to clean too and
> have Makefiles with
> one or two lines  like  test-y +=test_name
>
> Is it possible to do with Kbuild? That the same question as I had in
> previous email.

that can be done right now without any other issue.  create a top level .mk 
file, define topdir in the specific Makefile, and then include it.
topdir = ../../../..
include $(topdir)/common.mk

then the common.mk can setup common flags or create automatic clean targets
-mike

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 444 bytes --]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT 
is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet
the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & 
iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian 
Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com 

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 155 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] Installing outside LTP source

[Michal Simek]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sunday 31 May 2009 15:27:47 Michal Simek wrote:
>   
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>     
>>> On Saturday 30 May 2009 10:28:48 Michal Simek wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> On Thursday 28 May 2009 05:24:23 Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>           
>>>>>> I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.
>>>>>>             
>>>>> the Subject line doesnt really seem to line up with this question. 
>>>>> what exactly do you want to do and why do you think Kbuild is the
>>>>> solution ? saying "let's switch to Kbuild!" without any rhyme or reason
>>>>> sounds like a lot of work for no gain.
>>>>>           
>>>> I wanted to wrote two emails instead of one - that's why was there 2
>>>> different things.
>>>> 1. disable compilation "verbose" mode and turn on it with V=1.
>>>>         
>>> meh.  `make -s` seems to work fine enough for me.  most people arent
>>> reviewing the output for warnings and similar issues, so i dont really
>>> see much point of having quiet output in LTP.
>>>       
>> People don't do it because that warnings are hidden in huge log. It will
>> be good to run sparse too.
>>     
>
> i dont think sparse is applicable.  it is largely geared towards the policies 
> employed in the kernel.
>
>   
>>>> 2. Move all binaries outside of LTP source code O=/path
>>>>         
>>> you mean out-of-tree compilation.  you can use lndir to get the same
>>> functionality, but it isnt really an optimal method.
>>>
>>>       
>>>> 3. I use only some parts of LTP for my testing and it will be good to
>>>> enable/disable just tests which you want to use.
>>>>         
>>> you can run `make` in only the dirs you care about.  how deep do you
>>> actually want to get ?  having Kconfig entries for every single test
>>> (i.e. kernel/syscalls/{getsid,pipe}0{1,2} .....) is crazy.
>>>       
>> Yes, I agree that make no sense to add all syscalls test for example to
>> Kconfig but I can imagine tests for noMMU as are currently wrote in
>> Makefile.
>>     
>
> sounds a bit arbitrary.  you and i may be interested in nommu, but what about 
> other classifications of things people are interested in ?  that'd lead to 
> messy kbuild files where tests are arbitrary grouped and the resulting build 
> system would be just as bad.
>   

No. I am interested in MMU version and much more that noMMU one.
Paul J.Y. Lahaie added noMMU support to LTP and he excludes there some
tests.
Some of them make sense some not. Please imagine new guy come to use LTP
to test
his noMMU system and find that chmod, chown are exclude for example but
don't know why.
Is it mean that uclinux can't use chmod or I just can't run that test on
noMMU?
He will look to source and of course there isn't any description. Maybe
you are right
that we should create any doc file about uClinux usage or any sensible
solution.
Anyway there are a lot of tests which we could enable for uClinux
because only kernel syscalls folder in not enough,

The second things is relate with hush which you are solving at busybox
mailing list - which is out of topic here.
Thanks for that.

>   
>> For example will be good for all to know why are some tests exclude for
>> noMMU.
>>     
>
> i dont see how that's relevant to kbuild.  that info should be documented 
> regardless in the test case itself.
>   
Or in Kconfig description.
>> If you look to runtest for testing description, make sense to me have
>> all that filenames as Kconfig option and enable/disable that tests.
>>     
>
> ive never used/looked at runtest, sorry
>   
Do you run every tests by hand on any simple script?
You haven't run command like this?
./runltp -q -f syscalls

>   
>>>> 4. If is possible clean all Makefiles
>>>>         
>>> dont really know what that means
>>>       
>> this point depended on descriptions below. I think we talked about once
>> in past.
>>
>> There are a lot of additions like CFLAGS, LDLIBS.
>> CFLAGS += -I../../../../include -Wall
>> LDLIBS += -L../../../../lib -lltp
>>
>> I think that install and clean parts could be possible to clean too and
>> have Makefiles with
>> one or two lines  like  test-y +=test_name
>>
>> Is it possible to do with Kbuild? That the same question as I had in
>> previous email.
>>     
>
> that can be done right now without any other issue.  create a top level .mk 
> file, define topdir in the specific Makefile, and then include it.
> topdir = ../../../..
> include $(topdir)/common.mk
>
> then the common.mk can setup common flags or create automatic clean targets
>   

0k.
Michal

> -mike
>   


-- 
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
PetaLogix - Linux Solutions for a Reconfigurable World
w: www.petalogix.com p: +61-7-30090663,+42-0-721842854 f: +61-7-30090663


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT 
is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet
the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & 
iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian 
Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com 
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list