Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 08:03:37 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Subject: [Bug 201072] /etc/mtree/BSD.include.dist and /etc/mtree/BSD.usr.dist create various atf directories that are later deleted by 'make delete-old' Message-ID: <bug-201072-32464-1H8YgTdbDF@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-201072-32464@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-201072-32464@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201072 --- Comment #8 from Garrett Cooper,425-314-3911 <ngie@FreeBSD.org> --- I really wish there was a way to denote "severity" in this bug. It's a really trivial issue. Net effect: there are a few extra empty test (atf, pjdfstest, etc) directories created via BSD.include.dist and BSD.usr.dist. However, this "issue" isn't isolated to just MK_TESTS=no; try running MK_CLANG=no and you'll see a similar issue with clang. History, as to why I needed to re-"break" this, is that jmmv restructuring BSD.tests.dist to include everything test related in BSD.tests.dist in r258233 broke specifying TESTSBASE somewhere other than /usr/tests (see r275907). Isilon and potentially others depend on test programs living somewhere other than /usr/tests, due to custom/legacy partitioning schemes that can't be changed, etc. What *could* be done is that I could create BSD.tests.include.dist and BSD.tests.usr.dist, which includes just test-related entries and put them under MK_TESTS != "no", similar to how BSD.tests.dist is currently handled. I need to know whether or not that kind of a naming scheme is acceptable. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-201072-32464-1H8YgTdbDF>