Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Developers, please work on underlinking issues!
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 21:56:30
Message-Id: 20160818235612.4d7c584d@portable
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Developers, please work on underlinking issues! by Daniel Campbell
1 On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 14:20:41 -0700
2 Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > On 08/18/2016 06:21 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
5 > > On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:13:14 -0400
6 > > Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
7 > >
8 > >> If you just check your packages occassionally to make sure they
9 > >> build with gold it completely achieves the goal, and it will
10 > >> actually result in fewer bugs using the non-gold linker as well.
11 > >
12 > >
13 > > That's what a tinderbox is for. The only QA problem I see here is
14 > > that QA doesn't automate that kind of checks anymore since Diego
15 > > left. Maybe QA should ask Toralf to run a ld.gold tinderbox and
16 > > avoid asking people to randomly test random packages ?
17 > >
18 > I dunno, if testing packages that one maintains is as simple as
19 > reconfiguring a package, testing, and switching back then I don't
20 > think it's unreasonable to ask us to test our own packages. We're
21 > supposed to do that already, and for packages whose dependencies
22 > aren't 100% hashed out, it can help us figure out what the real deps
23 > are.
24
25
26 test against... all linkers, all compilers, all libcs, all kernels, all
27 userlannds, all useflags, ... ? :)
28
29
30 by all means, please do it, but there are things machines are better
31 at, like ensuring all packages have been tested against gold linker and
32 every failure has been reported

Replies