| 1 |
On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400 |
| 2 |
Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:23 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o> |
| 5 |
> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 22:29:29 -0400 |
| 8 |
> > Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > > Setting RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is generally sufficient. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > But that would require setting that virtually *everything* that has |
| 13 |
> > both tests, and required dependencies for tests. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > Which, in my experience, is practically everything with tests. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > To the point it seems like that should be the *default* mechanic, |
| 18 |
> > not a requirement that everyone pay not to have a randomly broken |
| 19 |
> > package. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it |
| 22 |
> should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the |
| 23 |
> "test" USE flag. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Which is the easiest path, updating the PMS or adding RESTRICT="!test? |
| 27 |
( test )" to thousands of ebuilds? I don't see how we can realistically |
| 28 |
hope for every developer to cooperate in making sure that their ebuilds |
| 29 |
behave properly in "USE=-test" situation. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Virgil |
Archives