From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John J Foerch Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add di. Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 21:56:28 -0400 Message-ID: <877fd097ar.fsf@hecubus.retroj.net> References: <87poqvam4v.fsf@hecubus.retroj.net> <20160703210212.GA22355@jasmine> <87eg7a9y7e.fsf@hecubus.retroj.net> <87y45i83pi.fsf@hecubus.retroj.net> <87eg79kims.fsf@gmail.com> <20160704190446.GB8480@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59007) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKFek-000336-10 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 22:00:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKFeg-0004iK-18 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 22:00:10 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:34859) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKFef-0004hr-Qq for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 22:00:05 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bKFec-0002Hq-Rk for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 04:00:02 +0200 Received: from 152.160.144.141 ([152.160.144.141]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 04:00:02 +0200 Received: from jjfoerch by 152.160.144.141 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 04:00:02 +0200 List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org Leo Famulari writes: > On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 09:43:55AM +0300, Alex Kost wrote: >> John J Foerch (2016-07-04 06:47 +0300) wrote: >> > A test relating to an included perl module Filesys::di fails. I hadn't >> > intended to include that module in the package, as all I'm interested in >> > is the 'di' binary. Given that, I would suggest that we bypass the >> > tests. >> >> As for me, I would also disable the tests. All these handmade Makefiles >> in all sub-directories are a nightmare. I think trying to figure out >> what is needed to run the tests doesn't worth it. > > I agree that hand-carved Makefiles are difficult to work with. > > The failing Perl-related test runs successfully if Perl is added to the > environment. However, there is another failure later on: > I would favor leaving perl out of the package for the di binary entirely, and if people want the perl module, use another package for that. -- John Foerch