Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2023 08:53:10 +0300 From: Gleb Popov <arrowd@freebsd.org> To: "Mikhail T." <mi+t@virtual-estates.net> Cc: Mikhail Teterin <mi@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 76772c2b0759 - main - www/websh: Unbreak, undeprecate, unexpire. Add LICENSE. Message-ID: <CALH631mUUSi77hDFJfkegA-cF6hfjBWPbSQ%2B0h8NQ1irg8b4UQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <22e32001-b097-47d8-8866-083727424152@virtual-estates.net> References: <202312242103.3BOL3Ea7060148@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <CALH631=2ERzQpyFMC8MB9GtsS%2BTrDMMz%2B0DXGdhh0PAKF6jCsA@mail.gmail.com> <22e32001-b097-47d8-8866-083727424152@virtual-estates.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 25, 2023 at 12:39=E2=80=AFAM Mikhail T. <mi+t@virtual-estates.n= et> wrote: > > 24.12.23 16:07, Gleb Popov: > > Porter Handbook suggests defining TEST_TARGET: > > TEST_TARGET identifies the make-target in the upstream's Makefile, does n= ot it? Not in the port's Makefile, which, as you can see upon closer examin= ation, is different... > > The problem with the upstream's test-target is that it always succeeds --= even if a test fails. So I have a little awk-script, which parses the resu= lts. Then the correct thing to do is to patch upstream's Makefile and then hook it into Ports infrastructure. Anyways, if you decide to override test target, shouldn't you name it `do-test` instead? > https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/book/#make-test > > I don't see, where that text prohibits -- or even discourages -- what I a= m doing. Do you? > > -mi Did you have a bad day? There is no need for such a tone. I'm just sharing my thoughts on how to do this better.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CALH631mUUSi77hDFJfkegA-cF6hfjBWPbSQ%2B0h8NQ1irg8b4UQ>