The problem that I have is that I don't know where coverage is strong, or where
it is weak. Before last week, if someone suggested adding a 'dhclient' test, I
would have told them it is redundant. Now, I know that dhclient actually uses a
different code path than both init and udhcpc. The only way I know to measure
feature coverage is to look at the LTP tests that we're running, and which
we're not, but that is a secondary measure.

Do you have a good suggestion for evaluating feature coverage? I don't disagree
with your feedback, but it would be good to have some shared perspective on
coverage analysis so that we can improve it strategically rather than based on
gut feelings, or as a reaction to uncaught problems.

I also agree with Mark's response that my coverage suggestion is premature.
This whole thread is premature. But it's also premature to bring in additional
test suites at this time. Have to stabilize and expand on what we have, namely
LTP.