| 1 |
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:20:03 +0200 |
| 2 |
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Santiago M. Mola wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Upstream clearly states that a gmp build which tests have failed |
| 6 |
> > shouldn't be used. I bet they deny support for users who fail to |
| 7 |
> > follow that indication ;-) |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> gmp isn't a key component if you aren't using math/sci applications |
| 10 |
> using it. You may point openssl as something you may want to have a |
| 11 |
> round of checks before is too late, same for openssh. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Minor nit: GMP is a requirement to build GCC >=4.3, so it'll be a key |
| 14 |
component soon enough. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> Changing the default features would just at best have people that do |
| 17 |
> not care switch to -test, people that care already about that won't |
| 18 |
> be affected and just create an annoyance. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Putting it in an eapi makes not much sense as well since you may |
| 21 |
> change the defaults as you wish since they aren't causing |
| 22 |
> incompatibilities. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> To sum up: |
| 25 |
> - having the test feature on by default isn't good for anybody but |
| 26 |
> paranoids and lazy developers, paranoids have that already on, lazy |
| 27 |
> developers will switch it off for them and let people do the |
| 28 |
> automated test for them. |
| 29 |
> - having that mandated by the eapi doesn't have sense since it |
| 30 |
> doesn't change anything by itself. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Fully in agreement. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gcc-porting, by design, by neglect |
| 36 |
treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect |
| 37 |
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 |
Archives