[bug#34056] [PATCH] core-updates -- gnu: python2: Fix test flags.

[Eric Bavier]

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 19:10:06 +0000
Christopher Baines <address@hidden> wrote:

> Eric Bavier <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, 13 Jan 2019 22:56:27 +0000
> > Christopher Baines <address@hidden> wrote:
> >  
> >> address@hidden writes:
> >>  
> >> > From: Eric Bavier <address@hidden>
> >> >
> >> > * gnu/packages/python.scm (python-2.7)[arguments]: 'EXTRATESTOPTS' ->
> >> > 'TESTOPTS'.  This overrides the default '-l' argument for memory leak 
> >> > checks
> >> > which is not compatible with the -j for parallelism.
> >> > ---
> >> >  gnu/packages/python.scm | 2 +-
> >> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/gnu/packages/python.scm b/gnu/packages/python.scm
> >> > index 9b43f465cc..dffded738d 100644
> >> > --- a/gnu/packages/python.scm
> >> > +++ b/gnu/packages/python.scm
> >> > @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@
> >> >                              (assoc-ref %outputs "out") "/lib"))
> >> >         ;; With no -j argument tests use all available cpus, so provide 
> >> > one.
> >> >         #:make-flags
> >> > -       (list (format #f "EXTRATESTOPTS=-j~d" (parallel-job-count)))
> >> > +       (list (format #f "TESTOPTS=-j~d" (parallel-job-count)))
> >> >
> >> >          #:modules ((ice-9 ftw) (ice-9 match)
> >> >                     (guix build utils) (guix build gnu-build-system))  
> >>
> >> Hey Eric,
> >>
> >> I've also been looking at some Python 2 things on core-updates today,
> >> trying to get the linkchecker package building again.
> >>
> >> I've just pushed a slightly different patch, but to this effect to
> >> core-updates, and only just seen this message, sorry about that.  
> >
> > Not a problem.
> >  
> >> Thanks for looking at it though, this approach is probably neater, as I
> >> used substitute* instead.  
> >
> > Would you like to keep your patch, or apply this one instead?  
> 
> I'm quite happy to switch to this approach. I don't know whether the
> best way to do that is to switch out the patches by force-pushing to
> core-updates, or to just apply your patch on top though...

I can just adjust my patch.  I think we don't want to force-push since
there are people working on it.

Thanks for your attention to core-updates :)

`~Eric

pgpRXjI4tSz4_.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature