Tach Hanno, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID)
Hanno Böck schrieb:
> I'm all for making more use of features like test and collision-protect,
> though in the past I noticed that many devs don't seem to care much. I
> even think to remember of bugs getting closed invalid with a
On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 12:04:01PM -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 17:35:32 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >| USE="test" is a workaround; portage cannot use FEATUREs in
> >dep
> >| strings.
> >
> >Actually, it could, if anyone ever g
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 17:35:32 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| USE="test" is a workaround; portage cannot use FEATUREs in dep
| strings.
Actually, it could, if anyone ever got around to adding FEATURES to
USE_EXPAND...
We would do lots of things; that d
On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 17:35:32 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| USE="test" is a workaround; portage cannot use FEATUREs in dep
| strings.
Actually, it could, if anyone ever got around to adding FEATURES to
USE_EXPAND...
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 17:14:23 +0200
Sven Köhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So my question is:
> where's the difference between USE="test" and FEATURES="test" ?
>
> So FEATURES="test" means, that portage runs src_test(), right?
Yes.
> So what does USE="test" mean?
USE="test" is a workaround; p
On Saturday 05 August 2006 15:14, Sven Köhler wrote:
> So my question is:
> where's the difference between USE="test" and FEATURES="test" ?
>
> So FEATURES="test" means, that portage runs src_test(), right?
> So what does USE="test" mean?
sometimes packages require special package dependencies whe
> I'd like to suggest we make FEATURES=test (and therefore USE=test) the
> default behaviour, rather than the opt-in we currently have. Far too
> many packages fail their test phase.
I have a related question, but first a comment:
I like the idea, that packages run their self-tests before they g
"Kevin F. Quinn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat,
05 Aug 2006 11:33:39 +0200:
> IMO devs should be working with "collision-protect sandbox strict
> stricter test userpriv" but let's not get too excited ;)
Don't forget (for the appropriate arch(s)) multilib-s
"Kevin F. Quinn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat,
05 Aug 2006 11:33:39 +0200:
> IMO devs should be working with "collision-protect sandbox strict
> stricter test userpriv" but let's not get too excited ;)
Don't forget (for the appropriate arch(s)) multilib-s
