On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 01:42:34 +0200 Bo Ørsted Andresen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Err.. Maybe this could have been phrased better but then I did expect > you would look at the bug before commenting. The idea is to enable > tests by default in EAPI 2 and beyond and let them stay off by > default in EAPI 0 and 1. This way devs who want to use EAPI 2 will > either have to fix their tests or RESTRICT them. Doing it this way > avoids the issue of having to fix the whole tree all at once. Users > can still choose not to go with the default.
if people are just going to RESTRICT tests when they fail (and they
will, because it's a hell of a lot easier than actually fixing them),
what's the point of having a testsuite at all? and once a testsuite is
restricted, it'll stay restricted even if upstream fixes the problem
because no one will bother checking. the time needed for
testsuites can be substantial. (auto{make,conf} can take half an hour
to run the tests on a fast machine (compared to the total compile
and install time of 10 seconds). the build time for gcc triples.) they
can pull in a large number of dependencies. etc, etc.
as i mentioned on the bug, i'd like to see something like
FEATURES=dev that would enable tests by default, turn on those QA
source code warnings, maybe some of the stuff from stricter, and other
things that our users don't really need but are important to us.
anyways, just my opinion.
> Users can still choose not to go with the default.
so can devs, and they outnumber us. ;)
--
gcc-porting, by design, by neglect
treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
