From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEC7A13829C for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 19:08:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1AC3314258; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 19:08:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de (mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de [81.169.146.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB34625402B for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 19:08:13 +0000 (UTC) X-RZG-AUTH: :IW0NeWCpcPchHrcnS4ebzBgQnKHTmUiSF2JlOcyy9p4roSnp5yQo4oJ5cg== X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo05 Received: from pinacolada.localnet (88-133-183-17.hsi.glasfaser-ostbayern.de [88.133.183.17]) by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 38.2 AUTH) with ESMTPSA id a05880s56J8937S (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (curve secp521r1 with 521 ECDH bits, eq. 15360 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate) for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 21:08:09 +0200 (CEST) From: "Andreas K. Huettel" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Can ATs add missing test deps? Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 21:08:04 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.2.4-gentoo; KDE/4.14.20; x86_64; ; ) References: <20160606082200.GA105497@skade.schwarzvogel.de> In-Reply-To: <20160606082200.GA105497@skade.schwarzvogel.de> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201606062108.09343.dilfridge@gentoo.org> 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 X-Archives-Salt: 8a83c037-407a-48d0-8ca6-283eb4b5600c X-Archives-Hash: 48e853264233822f461be24b7785690c -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Am Montag, 6. Juni 2016, 10:22:01 schrieb Tobias Klausmann: > Hi! > > It happens every now and then that during ATing, I find that > USE=test should pull in extra deps. This usually is an easy and > not exactly controversial fix. > > What's the hive mind's opinion on letting ATs add such deps if: > > - Only one level deep, but multiple first-level deps are ok > - The deps themselves are already marked arch/~arch to the same > level as the package needing them* > - The deps themselves are not humunguous when it comes to > compile/test times. > > * And by this I mean *all* arch/~arch keywords the base package > has, not just the one(s) the AT currently cares about. > > Thoughts? > > Regards, > Tobias +1 In the rare case when something shouldn't be added for whatever reason, the maintainer can just leave a comment in the ebuild... - -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfridge@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.1 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXVcoUXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRDMjhGQ0IwRjdCRUQxMzdBQUNCMDJEODlB NDRDRjM3M0U3RUU5OUU0AAoJEKRM83Pn7pnk+KsP/RMQMP58Vkbz/ND6nTqkFiZ2 Yji2H4AHBXZBxCnwVSr+Y3AHFBlQhj70Vg+cQXBYneZluO4IF73ssJRCiI04W4f+ bo2Br2b6N6mWOY/W9ebOVF3A3yDo3OQIWhcYrA58oiWFytPbYBeochraNPRKKL0L QR+wGGDJZu0IvJxY6Bu4g+CYzRdXWapHUifP9KzLwRcZTSwSogNfjLFk8SHg7dLk tOtc4frQ8u1ki7OytkepCCb5FjzoGJvyrNRmq+FyLe5En7e+dYzgcYeidkNIFPft MvKoDpJF2ZySwQeS9V7sFfrjIJ4/z3Ea1HX5zrrI/N7VzjkvLS3Xh//BIIxH/eRK nAL5WJjDaNghO5vCxR9oO9WREMyaVDajjrVARaxI3Z2vp+h7FoMRCI55AVCI7D3+ 1KjOM8muftP8BuPg/aiAgWbaDMgMGCMV41EpnuoU4wn0ZfvAtpblqUtu61f8zvNH OgaCsOtU4HbY6UPJ/4FRZx0ygDe0IDz+i8RCDytTFnJBwbNmlTyA55JxLhBIEcp5 VT8TfvFMfwBhzcgNHeUDZp1GoR5w5Q9k80zoCkDeLFeld6je3VaQf1IXWW5cydTf VUZIl3lV/XI4EKQiGNK3eoBLdJhM+edv/H2/DhJEgDb3XEaRsUpIXYWoHhvIUXx5 dHzMsDNc1URcfLkQCH1M =WKl3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----