Hey, folks. As discussed a couple of weeks back, I've always believed
the boot.iso, DVD and live boot method test cases ought to test bare
metal booting of actual physical optical media: we have no other test
cases specifically for this, and we do have other test cases
specifically for USB media and virtual machines (now). So it doesn't
seem to make sense to consider a VM or USB test as a 'pass' for these
test cases; potentially that could mean we ship a release without ever
actually checking that it can be written to and booted from a real
optical disc.
So, I've drafted up tweaked versions of three test cases which make
this much clearer (and, in passing, remove obsolete references to
anaconda's 'loader' stage, which no longer exists):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_QA_Testcase_Boot_Methods_Boot_Iso
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_QA_Testcase_Boot_Methods_Dvd
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_QA_Testcase_Boot_Methods_Live
The first two are slightly modified versions of:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Boot_Methods_Boot_Iso
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Boot_Methods_Dvd
The third is intended to replace:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Live_Image_Boot
Which is really very similar to the first two, but - presumably just
because it happened to get written at a different time by a different
person, or something - was worded quite differently and not named in the
same way. It's newer than the other two, but really I kinda prefer the
wording of the earlier ones. It seems to make sense to replace it with a
test case based on the same wording and naming scheme as the other two.
Comments, improvements, suggestions, complaints? Lay 'em on! Thanks.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
--
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
