Re: [patch] minimal test case for sha-1 and md5

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Tom Tromey writes:
 > >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
 > 
 > Andrew> In this particular case, I want message digest tests in the libgcj
 > Andrew> testsuite because they test important system components and are also
 > Andrew> an excellent test of the compiler.
 > 
 > OTOH, when we have an ordinary library bug, in my opinion the test
 > belongs in mauve.  My reason for wanting this is that I think there is
 > limited energy for writing tests (who wants to write them twice?), and
 > I think we gain a lot by cooperating with other projects.  So, unless
 > the test has some special meaning to us beyond "another library oops",
 > it is friendlier to cooperate.

You're positing an either/or, and I don't think that's the case.

 > IMO the big picture for testing is that we would like Mauve, Jacks,
 > plus various other bits floating around, to congeal into a TCK-killer.
 > (That's probably a story for a different list.)
 > 
 > There are probably limits on how many tests we can reasonably put
 > directly in libjava.

My thought is that the libjava suite is for basic smoke tests: is the
crypto library there, and does it seem basically to work?  Beyond
that, I don't think libgcj tests are appropriate.  It's a matter of
scale.

With the new ABI, we'll depend critically on message digest
functionality.

Andrew.