Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: R Hill <dirtyepic@××××××××.org>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: The usefulness of test in FEATURES
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 20:26:02
Message-Id: d50mqb$f67$
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] The usefulness of test in FEATURES by Maurice van der Pot
1 Maurice van der Pot wrote:
2 > It's understandable that fixing this is a low priority thing, but what
3 > I would like to propose is to either fix the tests or disable them.
4 > The latter would be the thing to do for devs who are currently closing
5 > bugs about tests with WONTFIX or similar.
6 >
7 > If fixing the tests is not WONTFIX but rather something way down on your
8 > todo list, I would also recommend disabling the tests in the ebuild.
9 > A bug report could be used to track these bugs, but at least it would
10 > not bother so many people while it is still unsolved.
12 Well, in my experience as a user that has made it a priority to report
13 broken test suites when I come across them (w/ patches attached whenever
14 I can), I would argue that if you take the maintainers that close test
15 failures as WONTFIX, and add to them the maintainers who don't care one
16 way or another, and have them all disable test in their packages, you
17 might as well not even have the test feature at all. :P
19 > By keeping tests that fail enabled in one ebuild, perfectly good tests
20 > of any other ebuild are rendered useless because it becomes almost
21 > impossible to upgrade a system with "test" in FEATURES.
23 It's not so bad. I keep a running list of which packages fail their
24 tests on me and it's usually under half a dozen at any given time. I
25 have about another half dozen open in bugzilla but most of them have
26 patches included.
28 I can definitely understand why test failures are a low-priority thing.
29 They're a pain in the ass and it's not like you need yet another thing
30 to maintain. But IMHO it's better to leave them enabled for some sap
31 like me to fix one day down the line than to disable them now and lose
32 that opportunity.
34 Maybe a way of lessening the annoyance of test failures would be having
35 a way to resume the build at the install phase. I'm thinking of
36 something similar the touch ${BUILDDIR}/.compiled trick. as it is, if
37 you remove test from FEATURES, touch .tested, and then 'ebuild
38 foo.ebuild install' the tests still run. This is especially frustrating
39 when you've just spent 6 hours compiling a package to have it fail
40 because of sandboxing.
42 --de.
44 --
45 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The usefulness of test in FEATURES Georgi Georgiev <chutz@×××.net>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The usefulness of test in FEATURES Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o>