On 6/1/14, 4:41 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>> I can't speak for other people, but please consider reporting issues
>> to Gentoo first. Our bug queue is under 30 bugs, while upstream is
>> several thousand. Once we can confirm a bug clearly belongs to
>> upstream, we can tell the reporter to file bug up
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 15:41:35 +0200
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> On 5/31/14, 8:30 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > On Sat, 31 May 2014 19:50:20 +0200
> > ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> >> This is one of my points: I don't remember a single chromium bug
> >> filed in Gentoo that would be caught by a t
On 5/31/14, 8:30 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2014 19:50:20 +0200
> ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
>> This is one of my points: I don't remember a single chromium bug filed
>> in Gentoo that would be caught by a test or that a failing test
>> actually detected.
>
> Your point covers the
On Sat, 31 May 2014 19:50:20 +0200
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> On 5/29/14, 12:46 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > In general it has always worked well after a compile; but, there's
> > every now and then one or another annoying regression, like recent
> > Chromium had some font issues or some random
On 5/29/14, 12:46 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> In general it has always worked well after a compile; but, there's every
> now and then one or another annoying regression, like recent Chromium
> had some font issues or some random tabs crash some versions ago and ...
>
> If a test catches one of these,
On Thu, 29 May 2014 04:09:22 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 10:09 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> > I don't know how much chromium is built and tested on lesser-used
> > arches (ie: arm, hppa, ia64, etc), but if there are dev's that try
> > and maintain these keywords th
On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 10:09 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> I don't know how much chromium is built and tested on lesser-used
> arches (ie: arm, hppa, ia64, etc), but if there are dev's that try and
> maintain these keywords that aren't in the team, it might be a good
> idea to leave src_test in p
On Tue, 27 May 2014 10:09:45 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> I don't know how much chromium is built and tested on lesser-used
> arches (ie: arm, hppa, ia64, etc)
No version of webkit/blink is known to work on HPPA, particularly
because the JS engine is broken on systems where the stack grows up
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 27/05/14 04:05 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Tue, 27 May 2014 09:02:37 +0200 ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr.""
> wrote:
>
>> I'm seriously considering just removing src_test to make the
>> package more maintainable (less code, less bugs filed, can focus
>> on
On Tue, 27 May 2014 09:02:37 +0200
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> I'm seriously considering just removing src_test to make the package
> more maintainable (less code, less bugs filed, can focus on things
> that *do* impact our users).
>
> If you decide to comment in favor of keeping src_test, pl
It's more of a project-internal decision IMHO, but just wanted to get
feedback from the larger community.
Currently 11 out of 27 bugs assigned to chromium.g.o are related to test
failures.
I don't remember a single case where a test failure would point to a
real bug in our package.
I'm seriously
11 matches
Mail list logo
