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
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
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, but result in an insecure and unstable package (I just "fixed"
