On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:46:36 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> Le mardi 06 octobre 2009 à 20:38 -0600, Ryan Hill a écrit :
> > Some packages, like dbus[1], have testing features that, while useful for
> > developers and arch-testers, aren't something that should be foisted on
> > users. Dbus'
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 13:36:47 +0200
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 October 2009 13:13:31 Duncan wrote:
> > The proposal then
> > was to turn FEATURES=test on by default for a specific EAPI,
> ... which is never more than a proposal by people not fixing the packages.
> Just FYI, building g
# Gilles Dartiguelongue (8 Oct 2009)
# Obsolete. Supported by in-kernel driver qspca_stv06xx.
# Masked for removal, see bug #286818.
media-video/qc-usb
It supported 3 device id's which have been supported by in-kernel gspca
drivers for quite a while. Also, it compiled with 2.6.30 kernel but was
ons 2009-10-07 klockan 16:46 +0200 skrev Gilles Dartiguelongue:
> Le mardi 06 octobre 2009 à 20:38 -0600, Ryan Hill a écrit :
> > Some packages, like dbus[1], have testing features that, while useful for
> > developers and arch-testers, aren't something that should be foisted on
> > users. Dbus' c
On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 20:38:18 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Some packages, like dbus[1], have testing features that, while useful
> for developers and arch-testers, aren't something that should be
> foisted on users. Dbus' case is extreme, as it builds-in functions
> that are useful for unit testing, b
Le mardi 06 octobre 2009 à 20:38 -0600, Ryan Hill a écrit :
> Some packages, like dbus[1], have testing features that, while useful for
> developers and arch-testers, aren't something that should be foisted on
> users. Dbus' case is extreme, as it builds-in functions that are useful for
> unit tes
Patrick Lauer posted on Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:36:47 +0200 as excerpted:
>> Now I see this proposal for making it a USE flag, which may or may not
>> be more appropriate, I don't know. I do know I'd love to see someone
>> explain the differences.
> It's a bit more selective. RESTRICT is a global "no
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 16:32 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> I wrote a script to check which ebuilds use built_with_use and have
> keywords in never versions making the ebuild unused. This means that
> neither arch or ~arch users are likely to install the ebuild. The script
> and the list of ebuilds is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Petteri Räty wrote:
> I wrote a script to check which ebuilds use built_with_use and have
> keywords in never versions making the ebuild unused. This means that
> neither arch or ~arch users are likely to install the ebuild. The script
> and the list o
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 13:13:31 Duncan wrote:
> Ryan Hill posted on Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:38:18 -0600 as excerpted:
> > I'd like to propose a new USE flag, qa-test or a better name, to handle
> > these cases in a consistent way. This would give us a way to
> > differentiate between tests that
Ryan Hill posted on Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:38:18 -0600 as excerpted:
> I'd like to propose a new USE flag, qa-test or a better name, to handle
> these cases in a consistent way. This would give us a way to
> differentiate between tests that everyone should run and tests that only
> devs and arch-tes
Hi!
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009, Ryan Hill wrote:
> [... separate testing flag/feature for
> complicated/long/somehwat broken test suites ...]
> [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/287722
I agree. However, some of the cases aren't quite clear-cut. Take,
for example fftw. Its test suite takes about half an hour o
12 matches
Mail list logo
