From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jookia <166291@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: gdk-pixbuf: Disable pixbuf-scale test.
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 08:04:39 +1100
Message-ID: <20160206210439.GA12535@novena-choice-citizen.lan>
References: <56b2fd41.57116b0a.987be.ffffd924@mx.google.com>
	<20160206151749.GA9236@debian>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50013)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <166291@gmail.com>) id 1aSA56-0006x6-7Y
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Feb 2016 16:07:49 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <166291@gmail.com>) id 1aSA51-0005NV-9G
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Feb 2016 16:07:48 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-x22b.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::22b]:37592)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <166291@gmail.com>) id 1aSA51-0005NQ-1S
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Feb 2016 16:07:43 -0500
Received: by mail-wm0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id g62so70078330wme.0
	for <guix-devel@gnu.org>; Sat, 06 Feb 2016 13:07:42 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160206151749.GA9236@debian>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 04:17:49PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 09:25:41PM +0000, Jookia wrote:
> > On systems with little ram (2G in my case) the pixbuf-scale test will either
> > freeze the system of cause excessive swapping without the test every completing.
> 
> The patch looks good to me, but it would be nice to have another opinion.
> 
> In any case, it should probably be applied once we have a bit more build
> power, since it causes substantial package rebuilds.
> 

Perhaps substantial package rebuild patches should be grouped in to a staging
branch? This would also help those that do their own builds (I'm biased.)

> Andreas

Jookia