On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 03:08:06PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Armin K. wrote: > > > I've personaly never cared about testsuites. Do as you may please. > > I do think it's useful for the book's users to know about the testsuites > and what we have found when we run them. One extreme case would be to > remove all mention of them. The other extreme is to try to go into each > issue and fix it, but that's really the developer's job. > > A user, especially in LFS, needs to do some tests to see if the install > is OK. After all, some mistakes lead to a huge numbers of errors. > > That said, in my last build of BLFS, I've skipped the tests when using > the version in the book because I'm reasonably confident that the tests > have been run. Building BLFS certainly goes a lot faster when you skip > the tests. > > I think I'll just mention the known failures when updating the book. > > -- Bruce
If it matters, I'm happy with mentioning known failures, or with "some tests may fail". I agree that running testsuites in BLFS is usually a waste of time. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
