| 1 |
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan.jr@g.o> said: |
| 2 |
> On 2/21/10 5:08 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I have one simple request. When you make a non-trivial change to an |
| 4 |
> > ebuild - a patch, a version bump, anything that can effect the |
| 5 |
> > behaviour of the package - please run the test suite. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Yeah, on my dev box I just run with FEATURES="test" all the time. Then |
| 8 |
> it's impossible to forget it. And I also catch failures in other |
| 9 |
> packages. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Maybe it should get more exposure in the developer docs? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> > If it fails, fix it. Or restrict it. Or even make it non-fatal if |
| 14 |
> > there's no other choice. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> It's really frustrating when there is a bug reported about package |
| 17 |
> failing tests and everybody can reproduce it, yet the maintainer |
| 18 |
> doesn't at least put RESTRICT="test" in the ebuild. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Is it acceptable for another dev to jump in and add RESTRICT="test" to |
| 21 |
> an ebuild if the maintainer does not respond to a bug report in a |
| 22 |
> timely manner? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
IMHO yes! of course, the bug has to be left open until the issue is fixed |
| 25 |
for real. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> The concern here may be that it's papering over the real problem, but |
| 29 |
> the good side is that it'd make running with FEATURES=test much easier. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
which is a good thing, since more tests will be run. RESTRICT="test" |
| 32 |
should always generate a repoman QA warning IMHO. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> By the way, for packages that fail the test suite and refuse to disable |
| 36 |
> it, I change the env locally so that FEATURES=-test (via |
| 37 |
> /etc/portage/env). |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
how many packages do you have in there? i usually just do it manually, so |
| 40 |
i dont have easily available stats on how many packages are affected. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> Paweł Hajdan jr |
Archives