From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21772 invoked by uid 1002); 11 Apr 2003 15:13:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 27121 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2003 15:13:07 -0000 Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 10:13:04 -0500 From: Peter Fein To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-Id: <20030411101304.383e5fbe.pfein@pobox.com> In-Reply-To: <200304101847.56952.george@gentoo.org> References: <20030410203310.4f275556.pfein@pobox.com> <200304101847.56952.george@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.11claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-solaris2.8) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] testing during emerge? X-Archives-Salt: c38f4c01-2fa3-489e-84ca-01e0444cd464 X-Archives-Hash: c805144b96ddd65d0c3471b2ac3b07e9 On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:47:56 -0700 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. 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