Test suite for Fiasco
brycecr at gmail.com
Wed Aug 10 20:00:15 CEST 2011
Hi Adam / Hackers,
Alrighty then, I'm trying to get L4Linux up and running, but I'm running
into some small hitches.
Everything builds just fine, but getting the system running I'm missing
a few things. I eventually found this in an email of Adam's from late
make qemu E=L4Linux-mag-x86
Before, download: wget -O /tmp/ramdisk-x86.rd http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/download/ramdisk-x86.rd
This helps me pinpoint my issues:
1) What is io? I kept getting complaints from the build script that it couldn't find io,
so I tried sticking in various paths to things called "io" to no avail. None of the io's
on my system have the signature /l4/pkg/io/config (though I understand this is just a possibility),
so which "io" am I looking for?
2) My qemu build is insufficient, so how do the instructions change building for an iso? Can I simply substitute
"grub2iso" for qemu"
3) What is the purpose of the ramdisk? Does this contain grub and all the boot information, or does it serve
some other purpose? Is it still necessary if building an iso?
Sorry for my noobishness here...please let me know if you need any clarification..
Thank you very much!
On Tue, 2011-08-09 at 19:02 +0200, Adam Lackorzynski wrote:
> On Mon Aug 08, 2011 at 14:07:09 -0700, Bryce CR wrote:
> > I've been tinkering with the internals of Fiasco a bit, and I'm at the
> > point where the kernel boots & runs hello as well as hello-shared
> > without issue.
> > The thing is, though, these tests seem to use only a fraction of my code
> > (and I know there are some pretty sketchy lurkers in my code...), so I'm
> > looking for a more thorough test of kernel capabilities to verify my
> > changes are relatively operational in many/most cases.
> > I'm aware of some options here, but I didn't want to use a hammer if all
> > I need is a screwdriver. So, to you: what is the most straightforward
> > way to test Fiasco with existing software?
> > I'm aware of L4Linux and ORe as possibilities -- are these good options,
> > or is there a simpler tool for the job?
> Well, the way has more or less always been to launch some more complex
> setup, like an L4Linux or more of them and keep them busy. A tool that
> covers each aspect would be a project on its own (or more).
More information about the l4-hackers