| 1 |
On Wed, 1 May 2013 10:14:02 +0200 |
| 2 |
Ralph Sennhauser <sera@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 21:25:40 -0600 |
| 5 |
> Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > I'm also going to rename the "test" flag to "regression-test" or |
| 8 |
> > something similar to get it out of FEATURES="test" control. The |
| 9 |
> > testsuite is a huge time-suck and only useful to developers IMO |
| 10 |
> > (always expected to fail and primarily meant to be used to check for |
| 11 |
> > regressions between patchsets). I'm a big supporter of |
| 12 |
> > FEATURES="test" by default and I think this is a small step towards |
| 13 |
> > that. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> This step is so tiny that we wont ever reach the goal like this. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I was hoping it would set a precedent and then people would start thinking of |
| 18 |
splitting up test into categories, maybe even start a thread about it ;). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> Let's |
| 21 |
> start to properly classify test into categories, like for instance |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> - expected to be run (cheap, no silly deps) |
| 24 |
> - good thing if run (still reasonable wrt resources) (current src_test) |
| 25 |
> - if you are the maintainer or simply curious. (boost, jtreg and |
| 26 |
> friends) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Something like "dev-test" or "qa-test"? I can think of a couple packages.. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> ... and improve on how to configure Portage whether to run tests of any |
| 31 |
> given category. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Yeah I'd love to be able to do something like emerge TESTS="dev qa |
| 34 |
system -extradeps -expensive" @world. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gcc-porting |
| 39 |
toolchain, wxwidgets |
| 40 |
@ gentoo.org |
Archives