make check discussion

Ryan.Oliver at pha.com.au Ryan.Oliver at pha.com.au
Thu Jun 17 19:57:00 PDT 2004






> So how would you have it be?  Recommendations to test in both
> chapter 5 & 6, or optional in 5 and recommended in 6?

Optional... we had this fight a loooong time ago ;-)
(being anal retentive I preferred that everything be tested but I
 relented on this point)

Optional chapter 5, and if no checks are done chapter 5
_mandatory_ instead of recommended chapter 6.

For those that choose not to check and they get weird failures
chapter 5 its on their own heads to work out what b0rked things and
more importantly what the source of the b0rkage is.

The more circumspect folk will run the tests and possibly save
themselves a lot of effort and time if they stuff up the initial
packages, or if their architecture/hardware throws up strange
artifacts which are currently not catered for with the CVS/bleeding
edge packages we are using (note the recent changes/updates in ppc
and alpha code in glibc)

Optional, but definitely not "not recommended".

People should be encouraged to run testsuites where available,
of course these also take a hell of a lot of time.
Most important checks are the ch6 tests (it being your final product), ch 5
checks give you the assurance that you are building ch6 with sane
tools.

[R]




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list