[Swan-dev] sanitize.sh vs re-sanitize.sh (vs swantest.sh)

D. Hugh Redelmeier hugh at mimosa.com
Tue May 26 19:38:40 EEST 2015

| From: Andrew Cagney <andrew.cagney at gmail.com>

| re-sanitize.sh and pluto-testlist-scan.sh are nice compact scripts, each
| with a singular job.
| It might be better to just keep them separate (on the other hand, having
| the decision that a test passed in multiple places isn't good).

pluto-testlist-scan.sh was born out of my confusion.  I could not
figure out how to efficiently figure out how the tests were doing.

It is meant to be useful in the middle of running the suite as well as
after completion.  Waiting 12 hours for a simple "you blew it" is

I would be happy if it were obsolete.  I don't know whether it is.

I do think that the GUI-based tool is way slicker (in a good way) than
pluto-testlist-scan.sh and shows promise.  But:

- It doesn't work out of the box (we don't distribute necessary

- It works in ways counter to my intuition (perhaps documentation
  could address this).

- It requires machinery that I don't really want to run on my test

- As far as I know, it only works after the test suite run completes.

(Of course I could be wrong about any of these points.  I haven't even
gotten it running yet.  I'm trying, and with Paul's help, I'm close.)

pluto-testlist-scan.sh isn't documented either.  At least you can read
the code easily.  It's only a stop-gap.

Somewhat off-topic: I'm not convinced that a machine running the testsuite 
is secure.  Too many things need casual root permission.  That makes me 
uncomfortable exposing them to the internet.  That makes it hard to 
collaborate. Our project is critical to security; it concerns me that our 
systems might be easily compromised.

More information about the Swan-dev mailing list