| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> What, you're saying they all ship with test suites that exist but don't |
| 3 |
> work? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
anything that takes more than 10m to test is broken from an user point |
| 6 |
of view: you want the application, not having it tested. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I'd rather keep it in features since tests are _optional_, not necessary |
| 9 |
to use the applications, just a waste of user time if they aren't |
| 10 |
concerned (e.g.: nobody but some would care about ffmpeg failing to do |
| 11 |
bit exact decoding of an ${fringe codec} nobody but who is developing it |
| 12 |
uses, and surely will be angry at me not being able to get those 20% |
| 13 |
speed improvements on h264). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
>> I don't think it shoud be part of the spec even if you don't have test |
| 17 |
>> broken on delivery. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> src_test is already part of the spec, and ebuilds are supposed to |
| 20 |
> either support it or RESTRICT it. I'm just proposing that EAPI 1 be a |
| 21 |
> lot stricter about it... |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Adding more build time, requirements (yes, there are some tests that |
| 25 |
needs more ram and cpu to complete than the actual build phase) w/out |
| 26 |
ways to opt out is just hindering our users. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
lu |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Luca Barbato |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC |
| 35 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives