Re: [boost] [boost@home] revolutionary solution to create a testing farm
07.06.07, 16:24, Janek Kozicki <janek_listy@wp.pl>:
Hi, Although the roots of my idea were different it turns out to be very similar to well known SETI@Home project. Therefore I call it Boost@Home :)
If your goal is to test many OSes on the most popular desktop OS, then I see at least one other approach: cross-compilation. It doesn't cover all compilers and tricky for "run" test targets but it has some advanges as well: - Quick build for embedded devices. - Better compile-time and link time dependency tracking. - Environment separation. In order to run tests, they have to be copied to target platform. Any missing dependency will show up. Of course, this change would introduce two different kind of testers: compile farms and runners. Testing boost without actually compiling it would attact more people and hopefully it would cover less popular OSes. If NetBSD can be compiled on cygwin, why boost can't?! ;-) -- Alexander Nasonov
<snip>
Of course, this change would introduce two different kind of testers: compile farms and runners. Testing boost without actually compiling it would attact more people and hopefully it would cover less popular OSes. </snip>
Hey I've got this great program I've just compiled. Please download it and run it using only my non-existent reputation that it contains no malicious code. On 6/7/07, Alexander Nasonov <alnsn@yandex.ru> wrote:
07.06.07, 16:24, Janek Kozicki <janek_listy@wp.pl>:
Hi, Although the roots of my idea were different it turns out to be very similar to well known SETI@Home project. Therefore I call it Boost@Home:)
If your goal is to test many OSes on the most popular desktop OS, then I see at least one other approach: cross-compilation. It doesn't cover all compilers and tricky for "run" test targets but it has some advanges as well:
- Quick build for embedded devices. - Better compile-time and link time dependency tracking. - Environment separation. In order to run tests, they have to be copied to target platform. Any missing dependency will show up.
Of course, this change would introduce two different kind of testers: compile farms and runners. Testing boost without actually compiling it would attact more people and hopefully it would cover less popular OSes.
If NetBSD can be compiled on cygwin, why boost can't?! ;-)
-- Alexander Nasonov _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- Bobby R. Ward ------------------------------ bobbyrward@gmail.com http://www.bobbyrward.com http://combustion.sourceforge.net
Bobby Ward wrote:
Hey I've got this great program I've just compiled. Please download it and run it using only my non-existent reputation that it contains no malicious code.
Many people run bulk builds of entire pkgsrc tree. Installing malicious apache is MUCH more dangerous than running boost tests yet some people use those binaries on their own risk. I think we can make runnning tests a safe process. 1. Compile farms should be run by people with a good reputation. 2. Upload of binaries should be secure. 3. Binaries should be PGP signed and have md5 checksums. 4. Boost script should check that binaries are signed by a valid compile farm owner before running them. 5. Script may chroot/jail the test framework on OSes where these features are available (well, it doesn't completely protect). BTW, how do you know that some developer submitted a code/patch with buffer overflow by an accident. He/she might be doing a preparion work to attack a next version of OpenOffice. This problem is more subtle and dangerous than "someone, somewhere ran malicious boost tests". -- Alexander Nasonov http://nasonov.blogspot.com Only the sinner has the right to preach. -- Christopher Morley -- This quote is generated by: /usr/pkg/bin/curl -L http://tinyurl.com/veusy \ | sed -e 's/^document\.write(.//' -e 's/.);$/ --/' \ -e 's/<[^>]*>//g' -e 's/^More quotes from //' \ | fmt | tee ~/.signature-quote
participants (2)
-
Alexander Nasonov -
Bobby Ward