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 22:27:04 +1100
Message-ID: <20160207112704.GA29222@novena-choice-citizen.lan>
References: <56b2fd41.57116b0a.987be.ffffd924@mx.google.com>
	<20160206151749.GA9236@debian> <20160206205624.GB6348@jasmine>
	<20160207111537.GB5011@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]:58277)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <166291@gmail.com>) id 1aSNVN-0000wv-Cp
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:27:50 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <166291@gmail.com>) id 1aSNVI-0001XJ-CH
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:27:49 -0500
Received: from mail-lb0-x241.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c04::241]:34871)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <166291@gmail.com>) id 1aSNVI-0001XF-3t
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:27:44 -0500
Received: by mail-lb0-x241.google.com with SMTP id dx9so3789252lbc.2
	for <guix-devel@gnu.org>; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 03:27:43 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160207111537.GB5011@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 Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 12:15:37PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> I basically agree with your comment, which is also in line with our policy
> of following upstream as closely as possible when building packages.
> On the other hand, a simple unit test that requires 2GB of memory seems a bit
> excessive to me and could be considered a bug in the upstream package.
> How about reporting a bug upstream, Jookia? And maybe disable the test
> in the package with a comment linking to the bug report?

Sure, I'm down for this. I'll see what I can do this week if not tomorrow.

> Andreas

Jookia.