Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Also relevant question: some tests require root privileges. What we
>> should do in such case?
>
> When I asked this previously I was told to check the current user's
> permissions before running them. I haven't had a case where I've had
> to though.
On l
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:52:25 +0300
Peter Volkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> В Вск, 16/11/2008 в 15:33 -0600, Ryan Hill пишет:
> >
> > > - FEATURES=test failures;
> >
>
> And what we are supposed to do if upstream states that tests
On 11/17/08, Peter Volkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> В Вск, 16/11/2008 в 15:33 -0600, Ryan Hill пишет:
> >
> > > - FEATURES=test failures;
> >
>
> And what we are supposed to do if upstream states that tests are not
> supposed
В Вск, 16/11/2008 в 15:33 -0600, Ryan Hill пишет:
>
> > - FEATURES=test failures;
>
And what we are supposed to do if upstream states that tests are not
supposed to be ran on users systems and exists for package development
only? Fo
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:24:34 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote:
> Guys, please remember that if you work something around, you should
> _not_ close the bug as RESO FIXED but keep the bug open so that the
> issue can be addressed and fixed _properly_. Otherwise we'll end up
Serkan Kaba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think, resolving as UPSTREAM might be more logical as we can't force
> every upstream to fix their *borked* build system and the bug will be
> left open forever.
If upstream refuses to fix an issue that _is an issue_ we have to fix
it, not work it aroun
