Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote: On 20:47 Mon 16 Mar , Ryan Hill wrote: Whether it's enabled for EAPI 3 or not, I'd at least like to see 'test' added to FEATURES in targets/developer/make.defaults now. That should (hopefully) raise the visibility somewhat. I'm all for enabling it in the dev profile by default. There are some packages[1] for which installing with --enable-tests is considered a security risk by upstream. What about packages such as this? 1. Well, okay, atleast one I know of -- sys-apps/dbus -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
On 20:47 Mon 16 Mar , Ryan Hill wrote: Whether it's enabled for EAPI 3 or not, I'd at least like to see 'test' added to FEATURES in targets/developer/make.defaults now. That should (hopefully) raise the visibility somewhat. I'm all for enabling it in the dev profile by default. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com pgpr4gIKb3PR3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Rowe wrote:
* Christian Faulhammer (fa...@gentoo.org) wrote:
Some years ago as a Gentoo beginner I read the documentation of
FEATURES and enabled test, because it sounded useful. After one week
I disabled it again as merges took too long and some failures occured.
Read: As a normal user I don't want src_test for every single package
that is installed on my system for whatever reason. FEATURES=test is
perfect for people who help maintain the distribution or want to test a
specific subset of packages they heavily rely on.
I'm just a user and I run with FEATURES=test, and have done since at
least March 2005[1]. I've definitely toyed with disabling it myself,
but only because developers aren't using it, which means I catch bugs[2]
that would have never existed if the developer had `test' enabled.
Just because we find failing tests doesn't mean we have time (or inclination) to
investigate and fix them.
So imposing that penalty on everyone even the unexperienced will
likely confuse some people. Go to the forums or the support mailing
list to see what I mean.
Package tests will have been run a -- possibly large -- number of
times when users see them if they are rolled in to the EAPI bump. This
isn't like the current situation of enabling tests and hoping somebody
has run them during testing.
You conclusion that developers do not run tests is based on nothing. Using
RESTRICT=test is not a fix and just hides the problem, so it is not unthinkable
that packages with failing tests get to stable.
Marijn
- --
If you cannot read my mind, then listen to what I say.
Marijn Schouten (hkBst), Gentoo Lisp project, Gentoo ML
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/, #gentoo-{lisp,ml} on FreeNode
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkngd5UACgkQp/VmCx0OL2yxyQCfeV2wrXCd3M2nrhGYRnQtBh2u
O24AoJzvNKtnov0yjpQdtHao7fXcFPGx
=Unhp
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
* Marijn Schouten (hkBst) (hk...@gentoo.org) wrote: James Rowe wrote: Package tests will have been run a -- possibly large -- number of times when users see them if they are rolled in to the EAPI bump. This isn't like the current situation of enabling tests and hoping somebody has run them during testing. You conclusion that developers do not run tests is based on nothing. Using RESTRICT=test is not a fix and just hides the problem, so it is not unthinkable that packages with failing tests get to stable. Well, I didn't suggest using RESTRICT=test so I'm not sure I understand your point. That being said while it definitely isn't a good result that packages with failing tests have RESTRICT=test set those packages aren't going to cause test failures for stable users anyway. Thanks, James 1. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85901 pgpzUTzTmUePl.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 19:20:39 +0300 Mart Raudsepp l...@gentoo.org wrote: All developers should enable it (a QA enforcement), but users by default - no, NO. There is more to a distribution than technical considerations. Yes, please, and can we do it now? I am frankly sick of failing testsuites and would really like everyone else to be sick of them too. -- gcc-porting, by design, by neglect treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
Hi, Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com: On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 04:12:02 +0300 Mart Raudsepp l...@gentoo.org wrote: It is quite irresponsible to enable that by default for the FULL user base, given the state of the tree in regards to it Which is why we are not talking about enabling it for the tree. We are talking about enabling it for a subset of the tree that's guaranteed to have been tested by it. Some years ago as a Gentoo beginner I read the documentation of FEATURES and enabled test, because it sounded useful. After one week I disabled it again as merges took too long and some failures occured. Read: As a normal user I don't want src_test for every single package that is installed on my system for whatever reason. FEATURES=test is perfect for people who help maintain the distribution or want to test a specific subset of packages they heavily rely on. So imposing that penalty on everyone even the unexperienced will likely confuse some people. Go to the forums or the support mailing list to see what I mean. V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode URL:http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
* Christian Faulhammer (fa...@gentoo.org) wrote: Some years ago as a Gentoo beginner I read the documentation of FEATURES and enabled test, because it sounded useful. After one week I disabled it again as merges took too long and some failures occured. Read: As a normal user I don't want src_test for every single package that is installed on my system for whatever reason. FEATURES=test is perfect for people who help maintain the distribution or want to test a specific subset of packages they heavily rely on. I'm just a user and I run with FEATURES=test, and have done since at least March 2005[1]. I've definitely toyed with disabling it myself, but only because developers aren't using it, which means I catch bugs[2] that would have never existed if the developer had `test' enabled. So imposing that penalty on everyone even the unexperienced will likely confuse some people. Go to the forums or the support mailing list to see what I mean. Package tests will have been run a -- possibly large -- number of times when users see them if they are rolled in to the EAPI bump. This isn't like the current situation of enabling tests and hoping somebody has run them during testing. Thanks, James 1. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85901 2. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138415 pgpf6HxovZzWP.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:47:17 +
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
http://github.com/ciaranm/pms/tree/eapi-3
Updated draft:
* S to WORKDIR fallback conditional for EAPI 3
* EAPI 3 has unpack --if-compressed, new src_unpack
* Formatting: -- should be -{}- for econf things
* RDEPEND=DEPEND gone in EAPI 3
* EAPI 3 has doexample.
* REPLACING_VERSIONS and REPLACED_BY_VERSION in EAPI 3
* EAPI 3 has nonfatal, utilities die
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:22:36 +0100 Tiziano Müller dev-z...@gentoo.org wrote: * Am I to take it src_test is to remain in its current worthless state? Yes, I'd like to see it enable by default as well, but we have to discuss that further. So, not suited for a fast eapi release. Please fix all 'pkg fails tests' bugs in bugzilla first. -- gcc-porting, by design, by neglect treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:51:00 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:22:36 +0100 Tiziano Müller dev-z...@gentoo.org wrote: * Am I to take it src_test is to remain in its current worthless state? Yes, I'd like to see it enable by default as well, but we have to discuss that further. So, not suited for a fast eapi release. Please fix all 'pkg fails tests' bugs in bugzilla first. The nice thing about doing it on an EAPI bump is that it's incremental. As people move towards EAPI 3, they'll all get caught and fixed. With the current situation, src_test is worthless because a failure doesn't mean there's a problem worth investigating. But if EAPI 3 starts making src_test run unless explicitly RESTRICTed or disabled, any src_test failure in an EAPI 3 package will tell people something requires attention. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:54:02 + Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote: On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:51:00 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:22:36 +0100 Tiziano Müller dev-z...@gentoo.org wrote: * Am I to take it src_test is to remain in its current worthless state? Yes, I'd like to see it enable by default as well, but we have to discuss that further. So, not suited for a fast eapi release. Please fix all 'pkg fails tests' bugs in bugzilla first. The nice thing about doing it on an EAPI bump is that it's incremental. As people move towards EAPI 3, they'll all get caught and fixed. Actually, that's a very good point. With the current situation, src_test is worthless because a failure doesn't mean there's a problem worth investigating. But if EAPI 3 starts making src_test run unless explicitly RESTRICTed or disabled, any src_test failure in an EAPI 3 package will tell people something requires attention. Whether it's enabled for EAPI 3 or not, I'd at least like to see 'test' added to FEATURES in targets/developer/make.defaults now. That should (hopefully) raise the visibility somewhat. -- gcc-porting, by design, by neglect treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 3 PMS Draft
Ryan Hill wrote: On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:22:36 +0100 Tiziano Müller dev-z...@gentoo.org wrote: * Am I to take it src_test is to remain in its current worthless state? Yes, I'd like to see it enable by default as well, but we have to discuss that further. So, not suited for a fast eapi release. Please fix all 'pkg fails tests' bugs in bugzilla first. And the fact some testsuites in system and commonly used libs take from 10x to 100x the buildtime to run. lu -- Luca Barbato Gentoo Council Member Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
