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 1ONHq8-0008S5-43 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:57:00 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8E225E0872; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:56:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33519E0855 for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:56:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F4511B41BD for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:56:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.716 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.716 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.117, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1l+SKXMoEWlu for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:56:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87671B41BE for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:56:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ONHpQ-0005cY-VB for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:56:16 +0200 Received: from static24-89-105-210.yk.rev.accesscomm.ca ([24.89.105.210]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:56:16 +0200 Received: from dirtyepic by static24-89-105-210.yk.rev.accesscomm.ca with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:56:16 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org connect(): No such file or directory From: Ryan Hill Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue" Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 21:59:27 -0600 Message-ID: <20100611215927.61574c95@gentoo.org> References: <4C0917B1.8080307@gentoo.org> <20100605214634.26fa6b78@gentoo.org> <201006071210.07109.bangert@gentoo.org> <20100607140250.2d8071e2@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> 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; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/vmhGwdgYHJXTikyd7WG=8oG"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: static24-89-105-210.yk.rev.accesscomm.ca X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Archives-Salt: 84dd3717-8fcf-4282-af3b-c1d261fa453c X-Archives-Hash: 61a13e4fb7a675c46a7187bde584f3f9 --Sig_/vmhGwdgYHJXTikyd7WG=8oG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 14:02:50 +0200 Jeroen Roovers wrote: > I see more and more calls for either 1) "fixing the test suite", as if > that is suddenly not an UPSTREAM issue but the ebuilds' maintainers' > When instead a test suite should do a SKIP but erroneously does a FAIL, > then RESTRICT=3Dtest is not the solution. Fixing the test suite is, but > then that's not the maintainer's problem, but upstream's. Oddly enough > we have QA checks in place (for ICEs, for instance) that direct users > directly to upstream (through the HOMEPAGE variable), when it's > suddenly the maintainer's problem if a package fails its test suite > (because of FEATURES=3Duserpriv or a missing kernel feature, perhaps - > nothing the maintainer can prepare the user's system for). I'm having trouble understanding how you can say fixing build failures is part of a maintainer's duties while fixing test failures is upstream's problem. A test failure _is_ a build failure. Yes, we should get it fixed upstream, just like any other bug. Packages can fail to compile with userpriv or missing kernel features too. Should we also send users directly to upstream in these cases? Can you explain the difference? I agree fully with all your other points. =20 --=20 fonts, there's a hole in my neighbourhood gcc-porting, down which of late i cannot help but fall wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 --Sig_/vmhGwdgYHJXTikyd7WG=8oG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkwTBiMACgkQiqiDRvmkBmLFNACfaQ1DbxfOm+1RoPgYEWtxr42x VOcAoJq0F6GHyC9SYk9zC+VJslbg+cQi =SKyT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/vmhGwdgYHJXTikyd7WG=8oG--