From owner-cvs-all Wed Apr 11 11:19:53 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from ipcard.iptcom.net (ipcard.iptcom.net [212.9.224.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CB4737B422; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 11:19:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from vic.sabbo.net (dialup9-26.iptelecom.net.ua [212.9.228.26]) by ipcard.iptcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA15693; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 21:19:40 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (big_brother.vega.com [192.168.1.1]) by vic.sabbo.net (8.11.3/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f3BIISt36338; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 21:18:28 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <3AD49FDE.CD028423@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 21:18:07 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Vega International Capital X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: uk,ru,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mikhail Teterin Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/graphics/lcms Makefile distinfo pkg-descrpkg-plist References: <200104111712.f3BHCgA20443@aldan.algebra.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Mikhail Teterin wrote: > On 11 Apr, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > >> It tests if the compiled library passes its own tests after it is built. > > [...] > > > I can't agree with you. I certainly don't want any superfluous tests > > run on my machine, > > They are not superfluous. They test what can easily be broken by overly > agressive compiler options or by the compiler bugs (difference?). > > And they just run once -- at build time. They don't affect run-time > performance. > > > just consuming my time. > > If one's time is so precious, one should use the prebuilt binaries. > Testing is part of any engineering/assembly process... If you don't want > to spend time testing -- get the thing off the shelf, prepackaged. I can't because I have to be sure that I have most up-to-date configuration, which is impossible with packages. It is why rebuild my ports regularly and objecting to putting time-consuming tests here and there (and no, I'm not stupid enough to use -O100). > > Perhaps you are overdesigning things. If you really think that it is a > > good thing, please provide a method to disable/enable those tests, or > > even better - separate rule and a post-install note: > > test: > > blabla > > > > post-install: > > ${ECHO_MSG} "If you want to ensure that the foo library ... > > This is one way of doing it, but, I think, this sort of tests should > just run automaticly. They are fast and reassuring. BTW, the testcms > routine is being built by the software's own ``install.gcc'' script. You think so, but I don't. Want a recipe to make us both happy? See below. > > In general please don't make any unusual assumptions about user's > > preferences. BTW, the same applies for the automatic -j2 in your > > several ports - there is no way to disable it, while in low memory > > conditions it may pessimise performance due to additional swaping. > > Right. And not using them pessimises the sufficient-memory > configurations. One way or another, someone will lose. I believe, > however, that with my way, the majority wins, while things _still work_ > for the minority. How do you know what is the best for a majority? Did you make a pool or what? Or you use false assumption "what's good for me should be good for all others..."? Actually, there is a way to ensure that all would win by providing an *option*. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message