| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
>> ex. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> gcc 4.1.1 works on x86 with the following: |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> USE="gtk nls -bootstrap -build -doc -fortran -gcj -hardened -ip28 |
| 10 |
>> -ip32r10k -mudflap -multislot -nocxx -objc -objc++ -objc-gc -test |
| 11 |
>> -vanilla" |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Looks OK to me. But hey, aren't arch devs and testers alike supposed to |
| 14 |
> test (almost) all flags? And also, wouldn't you also want to know about |
| 15 |
> FEATURES, specifically FEATURES='{test,collision-detect}'? How about |
| 16 |
> KEYWORDS? You would still need to be able to find the full `emerge info` |
| 17 |
> in an attachment, I guess. |
| 18 |
Heck no, I'd spend a few weeks just testing for example php. That's |
| 19 |
deranged at its best and insane at the worst. The request as put out |
| 20 |
to the arch testers is to use the system like they use any system, |
| 21 |
just that they only run x86, amd64 other packages except for what they |
| 22 |
are going to be testing. As far as features go we ask that they run |
| 23 |
the same as a developer should, test collision-protect on top of what |
| 24 |
is already added by default. Keywords is not useful for the arch teams |
| 25 |
as we know that the AT's run $arch and not ~$arch. However at least |
| 26 |
saying x86 okie with me here would be a requirement |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> I still think failures should be reported in separate bugs, as they are |
| 29 |
> likely to cause lots more information to be passed. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Kind regards, |
| 33 |
> JeR |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Actually, one thing that you might not know is that quite a few of the |
| 37 |
archtesters are capable programmers, they've tested a build that |
| 38 |
failed and went about submitting a patch that would fix the issue |
| 39 |
right there on the stabilization bug. Now you might want to say why |
| 40 |
are they not developers yet. Part of that is probably, because they |
| 41 |
haven't been approached by a developer yet, the second is that some |
| 42 |
can't dedicate more time then what they are doing currently to help |
| 43 |
the project, and that is alright. They are helping the arch teams |
| 44 |
immensely and I'm thankful for them taking their own time to be doing |
| 45 |
what they are doing. I might not always say thank you on the bugs, |
| 46 |
however I feel it everyday. |
| 47 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 48 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) |
| 49 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
iD8DBQFE3K8uSENan+PfizARAlacAJ4mb/pTvX119A+41a0qVG8SE3IrcQCfaOSn |
| 52 |
iMxOOBGJCXGxZfU+4BeB3Zg= |
| 53 |
=fbsi |
| 54 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives