dc@caveat.berkeley.edu (Dave Cottingham) (02/19/91)
I seem to recall seeing someone claim that one or more of the Minix system test programs cause some sort of file system damage. These test programs are going to be a big help to me, but I would like to avoid any that have known problems (or that Minix has known problems with). Does anybody know any facts behind this rumor? Thanks, Dave Cottingham dc@caveat.berkeley.edu
ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (02/19/91)
In article <1991Feb18.233559.27425@agate.berkeley.edu> dc@caveat.berkeley.edu (Dave Cottingham) writes: >I seem to recall seeing someone claim that one or more of the Minix >system test programs cause some sort of file system damage. I believe that all the 1.5 tests are safe. There were problems with test21, but I think these problems are now all fixed. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)
nall@cs.utk.edu (John Nall) (02/20/91)
In article <9061@star.cs.vu.nl> ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes: >In article <1991Feb18.233559.27425@agate.berkeley.edu> dc@caveat.berkeley.edu (Dave Cottingham) writes: >>I seem to recall seeing someone claim that one or more of the Minix >>system test programs cause some sort of file system damage. > >I believe that all the 1.5 tests are safe. There were problems with test21, >but I think these problems are now all fixed. > >Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl) I've run all the tests under 1.5 many times, and have not had any problems. So unless there is a really sneaky bug in there, Andy is correct. BUT.....but.....for people running Minix-386, it is my recollection that one of the tests either should not be run, or cannot be run. Unfortunately, I am far away from home and don't have the test number available for easy access :-( John Nall
cechew@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU (Earl Chew) (02/20/91)
In <1991Feb19.190451.7625@cs.utk.edu> nall@cs.utk.edu (John Nall) writes: > I've run all the tests under 1.5 many times, and have not > had any problems. So unless there is a really sneaky bug > in there, Andy is correct. There are bugs... but not necessarily all that sneaky. > BUT.....but.....for people running Minix-386, it is my > recollection that one of the tests either should not be > run, or cannot be run. Unfortunately, I am far away > from home and don't have the test number available for > easy access :-( test8 is the culprit. The bug shows up really badly under Minix386. It's the `I forgot Minix mknod() takes four arguments' bug. I think that this will go away in 1.6.11. Earl -- Earl Chew, Dept of Computer Science, Monash University, Australia 3168 EMAIL: cechew@bruce.cs.monash.edu.au PHONE: 03 5655778 FAX: 03 5655146 ----------------------------------------------------------------------