From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59455) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5duD-0000Sa-D6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:01:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5duB-0005jB-9F for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:01:20 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64237) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5duB-0005j2-1K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:01:19 -0500 Message-ID: <4F58BBA0.3070506@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:01:04 -0300 From: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4F582EDB.1040608@redhat.com> <4F58B5CB.8040503@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4F58B5CB.8040503@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Future goals for autotest and virtualization tests List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Scott Zawalski , Cleber Rosa , QEMU devel , "kvm-autotest@redhat.com" , Ademar Reis On 03/08/2012 10:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Virt/qemu tests: Minimal guest images >> ------------------------------------- >> >> In order to make development level test possible, we need the tests to >> run fast. >> In order to do that, a set of minimal guest images is being developed >> and we >> have a version for x86_64 ready and functional: >> >> https://github.com/autotest/buildroot-autotest > > I'm really not a fan of buildroot. Note that in order to ship binaries, > full source needs to be provided in order to comply with the GPL. The > FSF at least states that referring to another website for source that's > not under your control doesn't satisfy the requirements of the GPL. We have a full clone of the buildroot repository that points out to the sources, if it's necessary to have a clone of all the projects needed host there in order to be able to publish a binary image to help people, then we can do it. > Just out of curiosity, did you try to use qemu-test? Is there a reason > you created something different? I did, and it does what it proposes to. Nothing against it, but we have code that can do more things, that has been developed for longer time. It's similar to qemu-jeos vs buildbot, you have written scripts to create an image, which happens to be precisely why buildroot was written more than 10 years ago and it works very well, allowing me to put things on the image that are not possible with qemu-jeos. If the problem is to point out to all sub modules as git repos, we can make that happen too, rather than re-writing stuff that works. For a long time I would like to see people working on a single code base, because that would allow things to progress further and people would have even better tools to use. By implementing the features of qemu-test in autotest we could simply use the qemu-test tests and use autotest rather than qemu test, and that's why we have done it.