On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:37 AM Virgil Dupras <vdup...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:27:01 -0400 > Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:23 AM Kent Fredric <ken...@gentoo.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 22:29:29 -0400 > > > Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Setting RESTRICT="!test? ( test )" is generally sufficient. > > > > > > But that would require setting that virtually *everything* that has > > > both tests, and required dependencies for tests. > > > > > > Which, in my experience, is practically everything with tests. > > > > > > To the point it seems like that should be the *default* mechanic, > > > not a requirement that everyone pay not to have a randomly broken > > > package. > > > > If you want to define behavior that can be relied upon in ebuilds, it > > should be specified in PMS. PMS does not define any meaning for the > > "test" USE flag. > > > > Which is the easiest path, updating the PMS or adding RESTRICT="!test? > ( test )" to thousands of ebuilds? I don't see how we can realistically > hope for every developer to cooperate in making sure that their ebuilds > behave properly in "USE=-test" situation.
Updates to PMS happen infrequently, and generally only introduce behavioral changes in new EAPIs. Adding RESTRICT to ebuilds does not need to happen overnight; setting FEATURES=test still does the right thing for most people, assuming they haven't done something stupid like setting USE=-test in make.conf.
