>>> But instead, I'm going to suggest that we just stop mentioning >>> testsuites in BLFS.
>> Or at least make it optional? > > In principle, I think testsuites are awesome; I like the confidence > they give that the system works as advertised. > > I mean, if you're compiling from source, you need some sort of > validation that the system works. I'm guessing you've all run into > some practical downside. What is the case against them in BLFS? I > would think a system-built-from-source would want some sort of > validation. For my own scripts, I solve the problem by adding > comments in front of the tests. When I'm debugging my scripts, the > comments stay in. When I'm making a "master" build (to deploy across > VMs, for example), I do the full tested build. I agree. There is nothing that requires a user to run the test suites, but having them available provides a lot of comfort to many. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
