[PATCH] Updates on busybox POSIX compliance

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 18 June 2009 07:33:48 David Krakov wrote:
> Table can be updated only manually - documenting differences between
> POSIX and busybox behaviour on options that do exist.
> It can serve as a mini-TODO file.
> The only easy way I see to go with tests is to check for full
> compliance by comparing with GNU (which is not strictly compliant
> itself).
>
> I ran the test suite - there are some FAILs:
>  * Is it up to date?

unfortunately, some tests may require some options enabled/disabled.  it may 
or may not be documented.  this is something that should be fixed (i.e. XFAIL 
if a test requires an option but said option is disabled).  this is what we've 
been doing in the hush tests.

>  * I've seen some tests compare with GNU tools output - does it
> require a specific version of GNU utilities?

we only care about the latest versions.  that means some tests may have been 
written for older versions and so fail with latest ones.  or they're written 
for  the latest and so it is expected they'll fail on older ones.  we should 
document in the test the last known tested GNU version, but we should always 
be targeting the latest GNU releases.

> Though there are tests that can be used for this objective, the test
> suite is lacking a simple way to mark existing tests with some kind of
> a flag like POSIXTEST. How do you propose to do that?

i think we should split the tests so that POSIX and GNU conformance is kept 
separate.
-mike