Re: tp5 results
Andrew Josey <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.lsb.test-suite |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Thorsten, Mats Thanks. Good feedback. It sounds like we are testing on shaky ground . Choices are to (a) remove the checks for the K* links (b) leave them but issue a warning/diagnostic and still pass regards Andrew On Jun 20, 5:50am in "RE: [Lsb-test] tp5 r", Wichmann, Mats D wrote: > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [email protected] > >[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > >Thorsten Kukuk > >Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 3:58 AM > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: Re: [Lsb-test] tp5 results > > > >On Mon, Jun 20, Andrew Josey wrote: > > > >> Add the necessary prereq install_initd of lsb-initB. tp5 runs > >> a bit further. See below its the K* files that are not being > >> installed according to this below > > > >If this is your SL9.2 system, this kill links will of cource not be > >created. They are not necessary for a SL system, since they are not > >started in this runlevels. > > > >The question is: Is there something in the Spec from which somebody > >could expect that this links should exists? > > No. > > Well, to be precise, the non-normative example in the > spec might lead one to expect they /might/ exist, > but they're certainly not required. > > _______________________________________________ > lsb-test mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.freestandards.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-test >-- End of excerpt from Wichmann, Mats D