On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:09:46 +0100 "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 3/21/11 11:02 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: > > It does to me, I use them all the time. ;) The important part is that we > > install the test results, which can then be used for regression testing when > > rolling patchsets. > > I see, it makes sense. I guess you're comparing the test results before > and after rolling patchsets and look for regressions. > > > I think that glibc and gcc tests and other testsuites that nearly always > > fail shouldn't be run for the average user but should still be easily > > accessible in a standard way. I think we need a more finely grained test > > setup, where we can say tests are "expensive" or "interesting only to > > developers" or "known to fail", and let people opt-in to these on a > > per-package basis. Right now you always have to opt-out using > > package.use.mask which "works" but is unintuitive. > > My main point is that the developer profile has FEATURES=test, and also > arch testers and developers run with FEATURES=test. Being able to > quickly rebuild gcc, glibc and others is a win. Yes, I'm agreeing with you. I'd like these off by default too. We need a standard way of enabling them however. USE="test-dev" or something. I complain about this about once a year or so. ;) Maybe I should just do it. In the meantime: echo -e 'sys-libs/glibc test\nsys-devel/gcc test' \ >> /etc/portage/profile/package.use.mask > I'm trying to understand the problem better - do you know what causes > those test failures? I don't expect a "complete" answer because that'd > probably be a half of actually fixing the failures. The GCC testsuite isn't designed to pass. It's designed to be a regression test. Check before and after you apply a patch, make sure you don't cock things up. From http://gcc.gnu.org/install/test.html: "It is normal for some tests to report unexpected failures. At the current time the testing harness does not allow fine grained control over whether or not a test is expected to fail." Look at http://gcc.gnu.org/buildstat.html and you'll see this in practice. One thing I know of that causes a bunch of failures is the fact that we enable -Wformat, -Wformat-security, and -Wtrampolines by default. Any additional output during a test = fail. I patched these recently for 4.5 though so they shouldn't be a problem going forward. -- fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime @ gentoo.org EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
