Hi Steffen,
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 08:32:40PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
> >> There is more to the package than I managed to investigate:
> >> - How is the benchmarking properly invoked? It builds at least.
> > I have no idea for the moment.
> Cross-checked with upstream - benchmarks are a non-issue for us for now.
OK.
> >> - How is the google test properly built/performed? Better have a look
> >> at azure-pipelines.yml
> > Could you please add DEP3 header to your patch that deals with gtest
> > issues? Its not obvious for the reader what your changes (basically
> > commenting out things) are approaching.
> Done (at least a DEP2.5 header) and patch simplified again.
Way better (due do both the header and the simplification). :-)
> >> - Why does the build fail over detecting pthread bits when I enable the
> >> (optional) libcds inclusion?
> > You mean when enabling what you commented in d/rules with
> > # -DWITH_LIBCDS="1"
> > ?
>
> Yes, though it now works upon a dependency on boost-dev, just not with
> libcds, which also is very optional.
OK.
> [----------] Global test environment tear-down
> [==========] 819 tests from 71 test suites ran. (35669 ms total)
> [ PASSED ] 819 tests.
>
> Yeah!
Sounds good.
> I don't think there is much for us to do, really. Please have another
> look and if this also works on your end then I suggest to upload.
>
> Concerning the +dfsg suffix - should this not just be a +ds (if it needs
> a suffix at all) since all we do is not remove (mostly empty) directories?
I admit I always use +dfsg. I realised to late that the Files-Exclude
just excludes some empty dirs. From my point of view the actual suffix
does not say really much - its simply a sign that there is some
difference to the upstream original tarball. If you prefer +ds I can
change this.
> Sidenote: I had to force-push the upstream branch. Something apparently
> went weird when I merged.
I did not observed anything unusual when pulling.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
