No subject

accomplish the beforementioned goal of replacing sysv initd. Besides
that I noticed that there's an init app within the upstarts
sourcebase. Hence that should explain my confusion...

>> About testing:
>>       Currently the code is organized into one large C-file with what
>> appears to be whitebox only tests of the APIs. Has some thought been
>> put into how, if at all possible, it is to generate black box tests as
>> well for the code?
>>
> Black box testing is made difficult by the fact that much of Upstart's
> functionality is not accessible unless it is the init daemon.
>
> This may become easier with a move to cgroups.

Ok... good to know.

>>       Has anyone considered reorganizing the test code or adding
>> additional tests to upstart?
>>
> It's not high on my priority list.

Mmk. Pending that we do get acceptance for using upstart from the
Legal Dept then I'll most likely be working with my team to generate
some more whitebox tests for upstart, and will also help work out some
feature items.

Also, just out of curiosity have you heard of / worked with the LTP
group before? I'm working with them right now to improve their
makefile infrastructure, and we intend to use some of the test
reporting features within their libraries to assist with reporting to
our internal test harness. Is there any way where you think it may be
prudent to use their library as a base for reporting to help reduce
test code and make output deterministic?

The LTP is licensed under GPLv2.

Thanks again,
-Garrett