On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 14:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Oct 8, 2013, at 1:59 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > but in terms of the *general approach*, it is > > that the 'x86_64' column represents x86_64 BIOS, and UEFI represents > > x86_64 UEFI. > > OK good. Followup question: Is Mac EFI a suitable substitute for UEFI? > In a sense Mac EFI is more limited, so any failure there doesn't > necessarily mean broader failure with UEFI. Mac EFI is sortofa canary > in a mine. If it works, then UEFI should work. Well, there's always a slight element of subjectivity in filling out the matrix. If you have an extremely unusual bug that happens to affect your test configuration but would likely not affect anyone else's, you probably won't mark the box as 'fail' (perhaps 'warn'). I'd say that applies in this case: if the failure was one likely to affect other UEFI configs I'd mark it as 'fail', if it was exclusive to the config being tested, I'd say 'warn', it it works, 'pass'. If it's something that likely only affects EFI Macs, that's an...interesting question, but we do seem to mostly be on the 'block for Macs' side of the question at present, so probably 'fail'. Ultimately we can have multiple results for a matrix entry and the entries are only guidance for human evaluation anyway, so it's not too terribly important: the most important thing is that all potential blocker bugs are nominated as blockers. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin DOT net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
