svn commit: r319380 - head/math/libtommath

[Eitan Adler]

On 30 May 2013 19:47, b.f. <bf1783 at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 5/30/13, Eitan Adler <eadler at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> On 30 May 2013 03:42, Martin Wilke <miwi at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On May 30, 2013, at 5:17 AM, Eitan Adler <eadler at FreeBSD.ORG> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 29 May 2013 17:41, Martin Wilke <miwi at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>>> Author: miwi
>>>>> Date: Wed May 29 15:41:00 2013
>>>>> New Revision: 319380
>>>>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/319380
>>>>>
>>>>> Log:
>>>>>  - Disable regression test
>>>>>
>>>>>  Reported by:  pointyhat building 2(D)-02:56:27
>>>>
>>>> This doesn't really explain what happened here.
>>>> Did the regression test fail? Did the tests fail to build? Are there
>>>> no regression tests?
>>>>
>>>> If the tests failed are they false positives, or do they indicate
>>>> actual problems (where the port should be marked BROKEN)?
>>>>
>>>
>>> the regression test hangs without timeout thats why i have disable it.
>>> port it self builds fine no reason to mark it broken.
>>
>> Do the hangs indicate failure of the test program or failure of the
>> actual program?
>> If the latter it should be marked BROKEN.
>
> We don't automatically mark ports as BROKEN if they fail to pass a
> test -- if we did, a great many more ports would be unavailable,
> because most ports don't perform perfectly.  Often test failures are
> caused by the conditions in which the tests are run, or are due to
> problems in the testsuite, or represent uncommon or minor problems
> that should ultimately be fixed, but don't render the port useless in
> the meantime.

Please read what I asked carefully.

Is the failure an indication of a broken program?

BROKEN is not used just because a port fails its regression tests but
it isn't reserved just for build failures.



-- 
Eitan Adler
Source, Ports, Doc committer
Bugmeister, Ports Security teams