From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BDF8138334 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 13:44:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D6CBEE08B0; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 13:44:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83639E08A4 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 13:44:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-f175.google.com (mail-io0-f175.google.com [209.85.223.175]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: floppym) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9054335C0D for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 13:44:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f175.google.com with SMTP id 75-v6so10710173iou.11 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 06:44:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51DOqYBTSyHXaJ/POre5Cekz1TZ9Gd3Viqr76MPD+fu9lhvk3F37 9Xw00oWXRTRjddb2qOKlRHX5yOBvjN5Px6x8MP8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdYsPquGZYvE8MP75/WH/z1d1upgNyOQdhyr0fI/VlcZhYsFyNr+byH+gXy0UjAG5rHf8EamTg9amd7nU9ZhUbw= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:ea0a:: with SMTP id m10-v6mr7373644ioc.18.1535291042745; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 06:44:02 -0700 (PDT) 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 References: <20180824182406.17134-1-floppym@gentoo.org> <20180825084157.5488c8fd6f803834a9134814@gentoo.org> <20180826051140.431f4e28b45a8e857029e2c5@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20180826051140.431f4e28b45a8e857029e2c5@gentoo.org> From: Mike Gilbert Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 09:43:52 -0400 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] Add section about defining "Test Dependencies" To: Gentoo Dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 2afdcb82-b74d-4b96-a4bf-ea037cfd035c X-Archives-Hash: 04dcf994462c160b9ed563dedc3237a5 On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 10:11 PM Andrew Savchenko wrote: > > On Sat, 25 Aug 2018 14:24:02 -0400 Mike Gilbert wrote: > > PMS does not specify that behavior (skipping src_test with USE=-test). > > It is better to define the requrement explicitly rather than relying > > on a Portage-specific behavior. > > Then PMS should be fixed. Putting useless code in thousands > of ebuilds due to bureaucratic reasons is ridiculous. Having strict > conformance to the PMS is good, but common sense should still be > considered. I disagree with your opinion. Adding one line of code to many ebuilds is not a crazy idea, and it doesn't need to happen overnight. Adding RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is certainly not harmful. The advice given in the devmanual should agree with PMS. I think PMS is unlikely to change; if it does, the devmanual can be updated to match. Personally, I would not like to see a change in PMS in this regard. I think controlling tests via USE conditionals in RESTRICT is a nice way to avoid hard-coding the meaning of individual USE flags into PMS. It also gives the ebuild author more flexibility. For example, he could put something like this in RESTRICT if some exotic "foo" feature causes tests to fail: RESTRICT="foo ( test )"