Re: Squid 3.0 bugs that need you.

> On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 01:40 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>>
>> > yay! this has been causing me some nightmares just thinking about
>> it.
>> > I'll get onto a purge this weekend unless there is anyone else who
>> wants
>> > to do it or veto it.
>> > Speak up within 8 hours or I'll create a 'nocpp' branch and get to
>> work.
>>
>> Should be trivial. It already supports out-of-tree cppunit if you have
>> cppunit installed, and the cppunit requirements is only if your run
>> "make test".
>
> Which everyone should do before committing, of course!
>
> This reminds me - Amos - your IPAddress patch, is the code thoroughly
> unit tested? Thats as much a concern for me as is merging unused code.
> I'd really hate to add more chunks of untested functionality
> *particularly* when they are unused, as its easier for unused code to be
> spectacularly broken and unnoticed than for used to code to be the same.
>

It has not been linked to the cppunit testers, but I have written a
specific test app to check each function and proivide for maula-eye check
in increments from simplest up for both ipv4-pure then dual protocol
paths.
Then it has spent nearly a month in live run tests within squid and manual
debug traces.

That said, if anyone can think of any asserts that should be in there,
point them out.

Amos
Received on Thu Apr 12 2007 - 18:45:18 MDT