"HLFS Trac #1645: gcc/binutils test suite"
cmouse at desteem.org
Wed Nov 28 04:36:08 PST 2007
On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:07:20PM -0500, goodoldmarty at gmail.com wrote:
> No way our hardened code can be expected to can pass all/any of those
> compiler tests. We broke most of those things from the start. Lose the
> paranoia. My applications compile and run 24/7 beautifully. Good job.
> I recommend you release "something" as stable, despite moot issues.
> Open SSL and OpenSSH have both been updated and work great!
> Marty b.
> Putting Microsoft in a computer is like putting screen doors in a
> submarine. Hopeless.
(sorry if this comes in double...)
The reason test suites are usually made is to ensure that the
software in question operates as specified. It is not a matter of
paranoia if a test suite failes, but a indication that there is a
I would rather seek out at some schedule to fix the problem than just
ignore it with "well, look, these few software I compiled worked, so I
suppose nothing is wrong".
Please do not take the stance that "tests are only advisory" for this
project, the distribution is a very critical part of functional system.
Tests, at least for the build path, are in my opinion quite critical to
A good example is the JAVA package on (B/H)LFS side. With some effort, I
was able to make it compile without INSANE mode, unlike suggested in the
build manual. This means that the package can be expected to work,
unlike if it was made with INSANE.
Just my 0.02c rant...
More information about the hlfs-dev