From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Lh67E-0006Se-39 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:51:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD1D1E02D0; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:51:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp2.ist.utl.pt (smtp2.ist.utl.pt [193.136.128.22]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86A0CE02D0 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:51:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.ist.utl.pt (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A357000436 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:51:38 +0000 (WET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.6.1 (20080629) (Debian) at ist.utl.pt Received: from smtp2.ist.utl.pt ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.ist.utl.pt [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10025) with LMTP id lFk3NpK7-dBM for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:51:35 +0000 (WET) Received: from mail.ist.utl.pt (mail.ist.utl.pt [193.136.128.8]) by smtp2.ist.utl.pt (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF47700044E for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:51:35 +0000 (WET) Received: from maracuja (89-181-41-47.net.novis.pt [89.181.41.47]) (Authenticated sender: ist24237@mail.ist.utl.pt) by mail.ist.utl.pt (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D3B31400309 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:51:35 +0000 (WET) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:51:24 +0000 From: =?UTF-8?B?U8OpYmFzdGllbg==?= Fabbro To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ideas for a (fast) EAPI=3 Message-ID: <20090310175124.52bb2aa3@maracuja> In-Reply-To: <20090309202624.723e4b2a@snowcone> References: <1236498557.6854.51.camel@neuromancer> <20090309202624.723e4b2a@snowcone> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.1 (GTK+ 2.14.7; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/3yhhkY+f7uZaIHSP5IyevgH"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: e0ae77ff-4c70-4c76-87bd-bc29c3868226 X-Archives-Hash: b4c4fe8981594bfbaf6512ea8f89bae8 --Sig_/3yhhkY+f7uZaIHSP5IyevgH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Monday March 09 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >=20 > * src_test run unless RESTRICTed or explicitly disabled by the user > (bug 184812) Yes, and I would go even further: keep src_test for unit tests and some kind of pkg_posttest for either a routine to test the package once installed or an elog test recipe, a bit like the emacs testing plans. It could be useful for arch testers, guis, and revdep tests. It would force packagers to define an omitted src_test when upstream actually had one. =20 As mentioned by Christian, src_test is desirable in sci packages to get consistent results, but sci packages depend on lots of others, so you can't limit tests to some categories. And yes, you can't revdep test everything, but you can reduce bug load. It seems to be controversial, so unfortunately does not look like a good candidate for a flash EAPI upgrade. But really, don't dismiss it just because your pet package doesn't pass tests or it takes too long. One solution for packages taking too long to compile is not dismissing tests but a good binary package system. --=20 S=C3=A9bastien --Sig_/3yhhkY+f7uZaIHSP5IyevgH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkm2qKIACgkQ1ycZbhPLE2AMgwCbBORj43WQI7kxNADuTdz0fd9j M0QAn2Yj0QBHk55ck2upqTfvlbYzCDi6 =31+w -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/3yhhkY+f7uZaIHSP5IyevgH--