Timothy Sample <[email protected]> writes: > Hi, > > Robert Vollmert <[email protected]> writes: > >> On 8. Aug 2019, at 15:12, Marius Bakke <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I have one comment about the series: we've disabled tests on some >>> packages that have been broken "forever" on i686. It would be better to >>> do so selectively on just the affected architectures. I.e.: >>> >>> #:tests? (if (string-prefix? "i686" (%current-system)) >>> #f >>> #t) >>> >>> Preferably with a comment about why they need to be disabled. That way, >>> we will still notice when something breaks on other architectures. Can >>> you try it Rob? >> >> I don’t intend to, because I think the effort is better spent elsewhere. >> But do make the change if you like! >> >> The rough plan from my point of view would be to aim for an upgrade of >> the haskell packages to build with ghc-8.6 from a recent stackage LTS >> set, and reevaluate skipped tests across the set while doing that or >> once that’s done. > > This was in the back of my mind, too. Stackage LTS 14.0 (built on top > of GHC 8.6.5) was released three days ago. Upgrading will involve > sweeping changes to the whole set of Haskell packages, giving us lots of > opportunities to revisit these failing tests. If we still have problems > with the i686 tests, we can make them conditional then. > > Thanks for pointing this out though, Marius. I had thought about making > them conditional when reviewing, but I second guessed myself because we > have a lot of packages with comments like “tests fail on architecture X” > followed by an absolute “#:tests? #f”. If this comes up in the future, > I’ll just go ahead and make the tests conditional.
OK. Thanks to both of you for clarifying :-)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
