Re: Should we have a testing section?
On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Falk Hueffner wrote:
>Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> writes:
>
>> Currently we have some programs in the distribution that are only used for
>> testing things. I plan to add a few more such programs in the near future.
>
>Could you elaborate on "testing things", especially "things"? Do you
>mean whether a certain package works, or whether the package
>management works, or whether the machine works?
Sorry, my original message wasn't clear enough.
I was referring to software used for performance testing, acceptance testing,
and functional testing of software or hardware.
Some examples:
bonnie++
zcav
postal
Some potential examples:
programs to fake X events (useful for debugging)
programs to act as dummy servers to test client software
Other possibilities:
netdiag
--
Electronic information tampers with your soul.
Reply to: