From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA87FEE57DF for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 11:13:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB6C73CB3EB for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 13:13:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-3.smtp.seeweb.it (in-3.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 944253CB39B for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 13:13:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-3.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDD4B1A02394 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 13:13:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 489E121850; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 11:13:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1694430803; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bI2xocxgJgT3icDfebASLAYl6kE6FS8EGTp1Ez+wI2c=; b=yxkXcAcgCt5NGe8XIHH1OmUX5x94xPcTCs9UPPrPn6E74YdzqdwUijNDGfWqpfoiyYi8Vm VncNBE09VNXTMGH2T3n1a2PXYXu7zd1nRKsNKaWcwvmSWHh3clcT6yOY5heSSbQRXNI9eJ oTvsEVogVFo9FhsM8BQ6kX2q+12NupA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1694430803; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bI2xocxgJgT3icDfebASLAYl6kE6FS8EGTp1Ez+wI2c=; b=fcRXt3MM2mJWr0Bt1yioKCPIlZgoXVS1/6KF2B9BkHEhYclw8H7qWu0fCtQGkwH2dqjfi5 8fRQOzNdcmTUkoAQ== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3767A13780; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 11:13:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id VqiSDFP2/mQnYQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Mon, 11 Sep 2023 11:13:23 +0000 Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 13:14:07 +0200 From: Cyril Hrubis To: Andrea Cervesato Message-ID: References: <8ebe4638-fda2-43f0-98d6-8d49b9b5a1b5@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8ebe4638-fda2-43f0-98d6-8d49b9b5a1b5@suse.com> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.1 at in-3.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] Replacing runltp-ng with kirk X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ltp@lists.linux.it" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi! > The idea, now, is to replace runltp-ng, since it's not maintained > anymore, and replace it with kirk in the LTP official release. Given that runltp-ng evolved into kirk I suppose that replacing it with kirk in LTP is what we should do, especially since nobody is going to invest into runltp-ng anymore. I suppose that we should: - put kirk to some more offical place should it live under linux-test-project umbrela? - replace the submodule - add symlink from runltp-ng to kirk Does everyone agree or should we do something different? -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp