Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

On Sun, 2023-02-19 at 18:32 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > +Abstract > + > + > +A new ``TEST_SUITE_PRESENT`` variable is introduced to indicate whether > +the package features a test suite. It can be set either by the ebuild, > +the eclass or the default ``src_test`` implementation, and

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 3:11 PM Maciej Barć wrote: > > What if developer configured an ebuild in a way that it downloads the > test suite/files/data with USE=test? > > IMO it should be added to the GLEP that then TEST_SUITE_PRESENT should > be true (exists). This is what I was afraid of with the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

On Mon, 2023-02-20 at 12:42 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > How about using a new token in PROPERTIES instead? I don't see how you could alter PROPERTIES at runtime, or how you'd express three possible outcomes with a binary flag. -- Best regards, Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

How about using a new token in PROPERTIES instead? signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

> On 20 Feb 2023, at 08:37, Florian Schmaus wrote: > > On 19/02/2023 18.32, Michał Górny wrote: >> +Abstract >> + >> + >> +A new ``TEST_SUITE_PRESENT`` variable is introduced to indicate whether >> +the package features a test suite. > I wonder if we could not simply use IUSE="test"

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

On 19/02/2023 18.32, Michał Górny wrote: +Abstract + + +A new ``TEST_SUITE_PRESENT`` variable is introduced to indicate whether +the package features a test suite. I wonder if we could not simply use IUSE="test" for this purpose? That is, allow declaring the 'test' use flag, even though

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

On Mon, 2023-02-20 at 00:10 +0100, Maciej Barć wrote: > What if developer configured an ebuild in a way that it downloads the > test suite/files/data with USE=test? > > IMO it should be added to the GLEP that then TEST_SUITE_PRESENT should > be true (exists). > How does that change anything?

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

What if developer configured an ebuild in a way that it downloads the test suite/files/data with USE=test? IMO it should be added to the GLEP that then TEST_SUITE_PRESENT should be true (exists). W dniu 19.02.2023 o 18:32, Michał Górny pisze: Signed-off-by: Michał Górny ---

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 9:32 AM Michał Górny wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Michał Górny > --- > glep-.ebuild | 132 +++ > 1 file changed, 132 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 glep-.ebuild > > diff --git a/glep-.ebuild b/glep-.ebuild >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

Hi, Michał Górny writes: > Signed-off-by: Michał Górny > --- > glep-.ebuild | 132 +++ > 1 file changed, 132 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 glep-.ebuild > > diff --git a/glep-.ebuild b/glep-.ebuild > new file mode 100644 > index

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

On Sun, 2023-02-19 at 22:35 +0500, Anna (cybertailor) Vyalkova wrote: > Is it better than > > RESTRICT="test" > > ? Yes. RESTRICT=test is only workable if everyone reliably set it on all ebuilds not having any tests. -- Best regards, Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

Is it better than RESTRICT="test" ?

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] New pre-GLEP: TEST_SUITE_PRESENT variable

Signed-off-by: Michał Górny --- glep-.ebuild | 132 +++ 1 file changed, 132 insertions(+) create mode 100644 glep-.ebuild diff --git a/glep-.ebuild b/glep-.ebuild new file mode 100644 index 000..9ee18ca --- /dev/null +++