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

Re: [PATCH] Support for "hardware burn-in" stage

On Saturday 09 February 2008, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
> Chris' proposal would gives us the same situation as ppp-udeb.
> There would be some code depending highly on how d-i is working as a
> whole (its components might change along the development) which would
> not be easily modifiable by the d-i team.

I disagree. Splitting this in two would give us _two_ new extremely small 
udebs instead of one. The functionality in the postinst script of cpuburn 
is trivial.

> The removal of "ifconfig" made me aware of this situation for ppp-udeb,
> and I think it would be better if we could avoid it in the future.  It
> would also enable Chris' to maintain the installer component without
> having to bother Aurélien everytime he would like to improve the stress
> test without touching cpuburn.

That's only a very limited disadvantage as the cpuburn udeb is not likely to 
require much maintenance.

The only moment such a split would make sense to me if a stress-test udeb 
would become a kind of wrapper around multiple hardware test tools, but IMO 
the split could always be done at that time.


P.S. I also don't really see the problem with ppp-udeb and in that case the 
udeb-specific stuff is even interwoven a _lot_ tighter with the ppp stuff 
itself which means that it would be likely that you'd need coordinated 
changes in two places.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: