From: "Andre Robatino" <robatino(a)fedoraproject.org>
To: autoqa-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 10:12:32 PM
Subject: iso watcher, post-iso-build event, mediakit_sanity test patch for review
Hongqing Yang <hoyang <at> redhat.com> writes:
> Hi all,
> I have updated all except the minimum size of the isos, I have not
> thought
> out a good idea to do that. I think we need the minimum size, but
> it is
> difficult to say what is the reasonable minimum size.
I don't see why it's necessary to have a minimum size test. The only
problem
with an image that is too small would be that it would be guaranteed
to fail
other tests, and having a minimum size test allows a _human_ to catch
the
problem more quickly, but if some of those other tests are going to
be automated
as well, the problem should be caught quickly regardless. Also, a
small image is
much faster to download and run tests on. An image that was < 1 MiB,
say,
probably wouldn't even have a boot menu, and certainly couldn't pass
a test
such as
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Boot_Methods_Boot_Iso .
That is reasonable, I just need check their exist.
Thanks,
Hongqing