New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement --enable-* and --disable-* to disable packages #617
Comments
Hi Petr, So my proposal for enable/disable switches. The names are just taken from the directory names, disable/enable shows the default state
But there is one big problem: The But still disabling testsuites can have benefits for developers, who work only on parts of the library or on users who run ltp tests directly. |
@MofX Agree on + I'd still wanted to be able to disable tests which depends on non-default libs. There are many tests which use We could also revise But using just directories will probably lead to fewer runtest files which contains tests which aren't actually installed. That was the reason for using |
Current configure options
--with-{numa,tirpc}
are used to disable autotoolsdetection of presence headers and libraries (+ in case of NUMA it also changes
error message of the compiled binary).
But this confuses users a bit as usually --without-foo usually means that part
of the software is completely excluded (not being compiled). It's also confusing
as
--with-open-posix-testsuite
and--with-realtime-testsuite
options work like usersexpect it.
IMHO we compile binaries which only say "compiled without FOO support" because
runtime files expect them, but this could be solved by not installing affected
runtime files. The obvious benefits are smaller size and shorter compiled time.
There could be these configured options (all default on):
--with{,out}-syscalls
(or kernel?)--with{,out}-net
--with{,out}-rpc
--with{,out}-numa
--with{,out}-cve
(this one is problematic, as it's also among syscalls)--with{,out}-commands
(or userspace ?)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: