Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Lie Ryan <lie.1296@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Anyone ever emerged dev-libs/boost with FEATURES="test" and finished?
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 01:03:49
Message-Id: hpdu8a$mvj$1@dough.gmane.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone ever emerged dev-libs/boost with FEATURES="test" and finished? by Paul Hartman
1 On 04/06/10 02:43, Paul Hartman wrote:
2 > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Paul Hartman
3 > <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> wrote:
4 >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Paul Hartman
5 >> <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> wrote:
6 >>> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Lie Ryan <lie.1296@×××××.com> wrote:
7 >>>> I'm running with full system FEATURES="test" on, and I have a couple of
8 >>>> programs that depended on dev-libs/boost. The boost testsuite always
9 >>>> fails in my computer due to insufficient disk space, I usually simply
10 >>>> skip the test for boost and just go on with the merge. But today, I
11 >>>> decided to let the testsuite run to completion; so in preparation for
12 >>>> that, I plugged in an external harddisk and made it so that
13 >>>> /var/tmp/portage points to an empty disk image in the external harddrive.
14 >>>>
15 >>>> This setup works ok, and the testsuite is still running, however I saw
16 >>>> now that the disk image's is now taking ~18 GB (and counting) while "du
17 >>>> -sh" on /var/tmp/portage counted ~13GB.
18 >>>>
19 >>>> So, the question is, has anyone successfully compiled and run
20 >>>> FEATURES="test" on boost and knows how much space the tests eat up in
21 >>>> the end?
22 >>>>
23 >>>> I am suspecting of the possibility that maybe a testsuite gets into an
24 >>>> infinite loop while writing a file or something constantly eats up
25 >>>> diskspace. Or is it just that boost has an outrageously too extensive
26 >>>> testsuite and it will turn out ok if I just left it to run.
27 >>>
28 >>> I'm trying it now, I have 64gb free in /var/tmp so I hope that's enough... :)
29 >>>
30 >>
31 >> After almost 1.5 hours it is at its 22000th target and using 14G of
32 >> /var/tmp so far... I'll keep waiting.
33 >>
34 >
35 > It finished, successfully. 1 hour 52 minutes (normal compile of boost
36 > without testing takes about 3 minutes). Peak disk usage was about 20G
37 > when i spot-checked...
38
39 Finished too (sorry didn't post the update earlier). And passed the test
40 too, great. Thank you for trying it as well!
41
42 Final count: the disk image's size is now ~22G but I don't know how
43 large the real disk usage in the end is since portage cleaned the
44 /var/tmp/portage. That's one hell of a test!
45
46 > The ebuild checks for 1024M free, maybe they need to change that to
47 > check for 20G if testing?
48
49 I think so too. Let's see if I can file a bug on that. Done:
50 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=313315
51
52 ---
53
54 Anyway, I've been thinking about this for some time that turning on
55 FEATURES="test" globally seems quite impractical for many users due to
56 some test suites that:
57
58 - takes a disproportionally huge amount of time to finish
59 - takes a huge amount of harddisk
60 - takes a huge amount of memory
61 - pulled out optional dependencies used only for testing
62 - ships with a test that unconditionally fails (e.g. unimplemented
63 feature) but not marking it "expected failure"
64 - other behavioral problems (using network, restarting, etc though I've
65 never seen these sort of crime yet as of now, probably they're already
66 filtered before it reaches me)
67
68 Due to this problem, I think portage could have a test policy feature so
69 people can have finer control to filter out test suites that they don't
70 want to run. This way globally FEATURES="test" can be more feasible for
71 most users (and probably can sometime be turned on by default).
72
73 So is there anyone here that actually wanted to run FEATURES="test"
74 globally, but are turned off when experiencing the problems it brings?
75
76 Do you think if we want to hack this policy feature into portage or
77 emerge, what's the best option? Using USE-flags won't require much
78 change to emerge and portage but is quite inflexible; or new variables
79 in ebuild file; or a separate (optional) test description file that
80 portage will read and compare with the system's policy. Have better
81 alternative?

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Anyone ever emerged dev-libs/boost with FEATURES="test" and finished? Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk>