[gentoo-dev] testing during emerge?

[gentoo-dev] testing during emerge?

[Peter Fein]

Sorry if this has been covered before...

So I recently got hit by the gcc/pentium4 bug, as described here:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=43373

Why this was particularly annoying is that Python (and lots of other progs) include test suites which can catch these sort of things.  While this is a non-issue for binary distros, being able to run a test suite ("make test" or whatever) as part of an emerge would be pretty useful.  My ebuild experience is somewhat limited (though it doesn't look that hard) though I've done a good bit of work in Python.  I'd be willing to help out on such a project, if there's interest.

--Pete

-- 
Peter Fein
pfein@pobox.com
773-575-0694

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] testing during emerge?

[George Shapovalov]

Well, I guess this can easily be done via another USE flag. I see no reason to 
do any changes to portage or anything, just the ebuilds (at least some of 
them) should be done to allow optionally run included test suites.
And then, I just want to emphasize that this should be optional, as not that 
many people will be happy about forced increase in compile time. Thus I think 
this is the case where use flag is an ideal approach.

Then I guess you help can be in the form of submitting diff's against the 
ebuilds, where you would like to add optional tests ;). The tests should 
apparently be run from within src_compile() (and die on failure).
Though I somehow feel, that this issue has a potential to grow into a long 
discussion thread, what seems to be quite popular lately. So you might want 
to hold off for a few days to see how this turns out in the end..

George


On Thursday 10 April 2003 18:33, Peter Fein wrote:
> Sorry if this has been covered before...
>
> So I recently got hit by the gcc/pentium4 bug, as described here:
> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=43373
>
> Why this was particularly annoying is that Python (and lots of other progs)
> include test suites which can catch these sort of things.  While this is a
> non-issue for binary distros, being able to run a test suite ("make test"
> or whatever) as part of an emerge would be pretty useful.  My ebuild
> experience is somewhat limited (though it doesn't look that hard) though
> I've done a good bit of work in Python.  I'd be willing to help out on such
> a project, if there's interest.
>
> --Pete


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] testing during emerge?

[Dan Armak]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 845 bytes --]

On Friday 11 April 2003 04:47, George Shapovalov wrote:
> Well, I guess this can easily be done via another USE flag. I see no reason 
to 
> do any changes to portage or anything, just the ebuilds (at least some of 
> them) should be done to allow optionally run included test suites.
> And then, I just want to emphasize that this should be optional, as not that 
> many people will be happy about forced increase in compile time. Thus I 
think 
> this is the case where use flag is an ideal approach.

I know there are two or three ebuilds I've done with 'make test' already in 
them where it only took a few seconds. Other places I haven't as it took too 
long. A use flag makes sense here.


-- 
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Matan, Israel
Public GPG key: http://cvs.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] testing during emerge?

[Peter Fein]

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:47:56 -0700
George Shapovalov <george@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Well, I guess this can easily be done via another USE flag. I see no reason to
> do any changes to portage or anything, just the ebuilds (at least some of 
> them) should be done to allow optionally run included test suites.

I was thinking that some portage/ebuild infrastructure might save some code
repitition.  The problem seems more complicated than doing "make test || die" -
especially when you get in to expected failures, etc..  Maybe I'm making this more difficult than it needs to be. ;)

> And then, I just want to emphasize that this should be optional, as not that 
> many people will be happy about forced increase in compile time. Thus I think 
> this is the case where use flag is an ideal approach.

Choice is good.
 
> Then I guess you help can be in the form of submitting diff's against the 
> ebuilds, where you would like to add optional tests ;). The tests should 
> apparently be run from within src_compile() (and die on failure).

I'm willing to take a crack at this, but getting maintainers on board seems useful as it's a natural extension of the configure/build process.

> Though I somehow feel, that this issue has a potential to grow into a long 
> discussion thread, what seems to be quite popular lately. So you might want 
> to hold off for a few days to see how this turns out in the end..

You don't need to tell me not to work twice. ;)

--Pete
 
> On Thursday 10 April 2003 18:33, Peter Fein wrote:
> > Sorry if this has been covered before...
> >
> > So I recently got hit by the gcc/pentium4 bug, as described here:
> > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=43373
> >
> > Why this was particularly annoying is that Python (and lots of other progs)
> > include test suites which can catch these sort of things.  While this is a
> > non-issue for binary distros, being able to run a test suite ("make test"
> > or whatever) as part of an emerge would be pretty useful.  My ebuild
> > experience is somewhat limited (though it doesn't look that hard) though
> > I've done a good bit of work in Python.  I'd be willing to help out on such
> > a project, if there's interest.
> >
> > --Pete
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 


-- 
Peter Fein
pfein@pobox.com
773-575-0694

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list