On Mon, 23 May 2005 10:45:24 +0200 Francesco Riosa
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Cons:
| - additional overhead on syncing portage tree
Actually, with the new elib/eclass layout, this one's easy to avoid.
Just make a tests/ subdirectory and exclude it from sync.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Develop
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>On Tue, 10 May 2005 22:19:27 -0500 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>| On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 09:54:33PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>| > Is there a standard way of handling testing for utility-type
>| > eclasses? For versionator I currently have a
>| > __versio
On Sat, 14 May 2005 13:21:55 +0200 Francesco Riosa
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| ciaranm, would you commit it ?
Only if you comment on the bug with the results of the extensive testing
you've done to make sure that I haven't missed anything.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>Is there a standard way of handling testing for utility-type eclasses?
>For versionator I currently have a __versionator__test_blah function
>included in the eclass (source versionator.eclass works, it doesn't have
>any portage-specific code), but this is going to get a bit
On Tue, 10 May 2005 22:19:27 -0500 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 09:54:33PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Is there a standard way of handling testing for utility-type
| > eclasses? For versionator I currently have a
| > __versionator__test_blah function incl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Francesco Riosa wrote:
> Not tested version_sort() but I've already
> idea on where to use it.
http://dev.gentoo.org/~ka0ttic/bash/vsort
Wrote that up last night in order to test version_sort on a whole bunch of
packages at once (vsort -r ). Requir
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>On Tue, 10 May 2005 21:54:33 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>| Is there a standard way of handling testing for utility-type eclasses?
>| For versionator I currently have a __versionator__test_blah function
>| included in the eclass (source versionator.ecl
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 09:54:33PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Is there a standard way of handling testing for utility-type eclasses?
> For versionator I currently have a __versionator__test_blah function
> included in the eclass (source versionator.eclass works, it doesn't have
> any portage-s
On Tue, 10 May 2005 21:54:33 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Is there a standard way of handling testing for utility-type eclasses?
| For versionator I currently have a __versionator__test_blah function
| included in the eclass (source versionator.eclass works, it doesn't
| have
Is there a standard way of handling testing for utility-type eclasses?
For versionator I currently have a __versionator__test_blah function
included in the eclass (source versionator.eclass works, it doesn't have
any portage-specific code), but this is going to get a bit messy when I
add in another
10 matches
Mail list logo
