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

[Eric Bavier]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2019 09:48:59 +0200
Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 01:18:49AM -0600, address@hidden wrote:
> > 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))
> > -- 
> > 2.20.1
> >   
> 
> I'm building out python2 now on my aarch64 board but I assume it'll
> work. While I do prefer the parallelism in the test suite, between the
> two I'd consider the memory leak checks the more important of the two.
> 

Are the memory-leak checks something that we need to worry about in our
packaging of python2?  Can memory leaks be introduced in the way we
configure and build our python?  Otherwise I assume that's something
more interesting to someone developing python itself and not as
interesting in system CI.  IMHO.

I see I should probably move the comment about this overriding -l from
the commit message to the code comment.

`~Eric

pgpZUtU2CgYmm.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature