Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:20:55 +0200
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:

because EAPI1 isn't specified completely so you don't have a large
field to cover but you also do not know the bounds of it.


It really doesn't matter how it is specified. You have an
implementation of it and should make sure, that this implementation
works.


Seems to works well enough for people using it.



Presumably those people, if they exist, haven't tried to go through and
install every EAPI 1 package in the tree (excluding KDE, since that's
big and slow, and starting backwards since the x11- categories are nice
and pretty).



I did. Can't reproduce. Go away.

--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:34:43 +0200
Patrick Lauer <bugs@dev.gentooexperimental.org> wrote:
> > Presumably those people, if they exist, haven't tried to go through
> > and install every EAPI 1 package in the tree (excluding KDE, since
> > that's big and slow, and starting backwards since the x11-
> > categories are nice and pretty).
> >
> I did. Can't reproduce. Go away.

Then you should probably see a doctor. Also, you should really check
your results a lot more carefully -- perhaps there's also a bug in your
build tool that makes it not recognise when something fails?

--
Ciaran McCreesh

> If, as a user or an arch person, I get a src_test failure right now, I
> don't know whether this means "eek! Something's gone wrong, and I
> really need to fix this" or "oh, whoever maintains this package
> doesn't care". But with EAPI 2, I'll be able to know that a src_test
> failure really does mean "something's wrong".
>

A developer should always care about src_test in my opinion. That some
developers don't is a nuisance, and the core of the problem. But trying
to change this via EAPI is doing things the wrong way round: At first
there has to be an agreement about the importance of test suites (backed
up by strict policies that every developer is bound to), and then we can
discuss if it makes sense to activate them by default in EAPI-X.

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

Presumably those people, if they exist, haven't tried to go through and
install every EAPI 1 package in the tree (excluding KDE, since that's
big and slow, and starting backwards since the x11- categories are nice
and pretty).


Nice game, still you aren't giving substance to your claims.

lu

--

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

On Thursday 12 June 2008 02:46:03 Jim Ramsay wrote:
> David Leverton <levertond@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Since at least one ebuild has already been modified specifically to
> > work around the bug, I'd say it's pretty real.
>
> For those of us trying to play along at home, which one is this?

http://tinyurl.com/4w4t69
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

On Wednesday 11 June 2008 19:00:16 David Leverton wrote:
> On Thursday 12 June 2008 02:46:03 Jim Ramsay wrote:
> > David Leverton <levertond@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > Since at least one ebuild has already been modified specifically to
> > > work around the bug, I'd say it's pretty real.
> >
> > For those of us trying to play along at home, which one is this?
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4w4t69

Why the need for EAPI=1?
A cursory glance shows nothing unusual.

Thanks

Roy
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

On 11-06-2008 20:24:18 +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 June 2008 19:00:16 David Leverton wrote:
> > On Thursday 12 June 2008 02:46:03 Jim Ramsay wrote:
> > > David Leverton <levertond@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > > Since at least one ebuild has already been modified specifically to
> > > > work around the bug, I'd say it's pretty real.
> > >
> > > For those of us trying to play along at home, which one is this?
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/4w4t69
>
> Why the need for EAPI=1?
> A cursory glance shows nothing unusual.

slot deps


--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

David Leverton <levertond@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Since at least one ebuild has already been modified specifically to
> work around the bug, I'd say it's pretty real.

For those of us trying to play along at home, which one is this?

--
Jim Ramsay
Gentoo/Linux Developer (rox,gkrellm)

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:20:03 +0200
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> > Upstream clearly states that a gmp build which tests have failed
> > shouldn't be used. I bet they deny support for users who fail to
> > follow that indication ;-)
>
> gmp isn't a key component if you aren't using math/sci applications
> using it. You may point openssl as something you may want to have a
> round of checks before is too late, same for openssh.

Minor nit: GMP is a requirement to build GCC >=4.3, so it'll be a key
component soon enough.

> Changing the default features would just at best have people that do
> not care switch to -test, people that care already about that won't
> be affected and just create an annoyance.
>
> Putting it in an eapi makes not much sense as well since you may
> change the defaults as you wish since they aren't causing
> incompatibilities.
>
> To sum up:
> - having the test feature on by default isn't good for anybody but
> paranoids and lazy developers, paranoids have that already on, lazy
> developers will switch it off for them and let people do the
> automated test for them.
> - having that mandated by the eapi doesn't have sense since it
> doesn't change anything by itself.

Fully in agreement.

--
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

В Срд, 11/06/2008 в 07:53 +0200, Luca Barbato пишет:
> Getting the build time from 30minutes to an hour or more?

Actually I don't understand this concern. If you bother about time
tests take don't build package from sources - use binary packages. If
you build program by yourself - run testsuite to be sure it was built
correctly in your environment...

--
Peter.

--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list