Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 20:39:36 -0500 From: Julio Merino <julio@meroh.net> To: Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Confusion over BSD.tests.dist Message-ID: <CADyfeQV0DC4SgQ21DGVz2_ZTgGLpsC-iOKPVwZ9e7N-AfLyH7g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <500AA3D4-6910-406A-A093-1B925DF0612D@gmail.com> References: <83E6FED5-2E76-4E43-9547-C0DC1C90DBBD@gmail.com> <AD5A2A2F-DC12-4DBC-8E63-9EC7A872B7B7@gmail.com> <CADyfeQVxJbX7uRWtOhCsBNQdZ7=qnwH=s7QCYWQbq%2BLO4E%2BESg@mail.gmail.com> <E9B8E13C-1679-4507-8949-BF8F48102E53@gmail.com> <CADyfeQVq2gr9aGu=Zi4rpKM9FfP24c-CZ2SRjkCfQ4aBL=2-ww@mail.gmail.com> <500AA3D4-6910-406A-A093-1B925DF0612D@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> On Nov 24, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Julio Merino <julio@meroh.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>>> On Nov 24, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Julio Merino <julio@meroh.net> wrote:
>>>> Is TESTSBASE supposed to be customizable? (And before answering that:
>>>
>>> It can be:
>>>
>>> # grep -r TESTSBASE share/mk
>>> share/mk/bsd.README:TESTSDIR Target directory relative to ${TESTSBAS=
E} for tests and
>>> share/mk/bsd.own.mk:TESTSBASE?=3D /usr/tests
>>
>> I know it _can_ be, but the question is: do we want to support that as
>> a use case? I'm not sure why anybody would want to move /usr/tests
>> anywhere else. If there is no real reason other than "just because",
>> I don't think the build system should make any accommodations to make
>> it trivial. (Because if it's trivial, people _will_ move it and when
>> things break, it's one more thing to support in bug reports.)
>
> Fair enough. The problem is that there are some organizations (like the o=
ne I just left =97 EMC) that use other paths for testing (i.e. not /usr/tes=
ts) because adjusting existing infrastructure to match new stuff is difficu=
lt, introduces unnecessary risk, and could break generic tools.
Right... so that's the use case I was looking for: organization that
"cannot" change existing infrastructure to match the /usr/tests path.
I don't know the details of your previous company at all, but I'm
wondering if the path is the only thing that matters or it's just one
tiny detail among many?
I understand the use case... so the question is: is it worth
supporting it (going all the way through to support this and other
customizations that such scheme may require)? (Personally I tend to
think it's not, but I don't have a strong opinion as long as the
proposed modifications are simple enough.)
--=20
Julio Merino / @jmmv
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADyfeQV0DC4SgQ21DGVz2_ZTgGLpsC-iOKPVwZ9e7N-AfLyH7g>