Re: Bug#970353: mksh: Ignores "nocheck" in DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Finn Thain dixit:
>
> >I think it would be helpful to everyone if nocheck could be avoided
> >where possible. I wonder where is that possible.
>
> I'd prefer if it could be added only for problematic packages, or done
> in porter uploads, but on the buildds not for all packages.
>
If the problem was build time, one solution could be to enable 'make
check' at random (for slow packages) with some predetermined probability
needed to reach the desired average buildd throughput.
> >Which architectures are using nocheck?
>
> According to the list in, I think, GCC, which I copied, that is on m68k
> and sh4. (The package I copied from ignores nocheck on these
> architectures as well, as protection from greater issues.)
>
I wonder whether sh4 and m68k have the same reason for using nocheck.
> >Would it help if test failures could be triaged, such that an "ENOMEM"
> >result could be treated as "undecided", since that is what it is?
>
> I highly doubt that. Test failures abort the build, and you can't just
> carry on afterwards.
>
It's normal for the build to carry on after a "skipped" test. And nocheck
just means skip all tests, right?
Treating "ENOMEM" like "skipped" for certain tests is probably more
correct in many instances than treating it like "failed".
The implementation of that logic would probably have to be made acceptable
to upstream developers however.
> Plus I think these aren't even the problems; problematic is when the
> testsuite hangs the buildd. (But even so, builds are killed after some
> time of inactivity, normally.)
>
I can see that being a problem at 66 MHz but is it still a problem for
qemu-user or qemu-system?
Reply to: