On 14.12.2016 11:17, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:01:10AM +0100, Ján Tomko wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 09:15:12AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> Anyone want to review this, if not I'll just claim its a build >>> breaker fix... >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 09:56:43AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>>> On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 12:04:36PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>>>> I was not originally planning to do anything for the gnutls 3.5.6 >>>>> regression: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-November/msg00816.html >>>>> >>>>> but there's still no immediate sign of the new 3.5.7 release, >>>>> so while I still don't want to workaround the bug in libvirt, >>>>> we can at least blacklist that version of gnutls in the test >>>>> suite, so 'make check' passes on affected systems while we're >>>>> waiting for 3.5.7 to arrive. >>>> >>>> 3.5.7 has just hit Fedora updates-testing, but I figure we >>>> might as well still blacklist 3.5.6 in our tests >>> >> >> Isn't the point of the test suite to also fail on broken systems? > > To some extent yes. The question is whether the failure is serious > enough that we should continue to have the tests failure, or just a > minor annoyance that we should paper over it. > > I'm fairly on the fence about this one - originally I wasn't going > to fix it, but it took a while for 3.5.7 to arrive and quite a few > people raised the issue of broken tests to me in the meanwhile. > > We could just leave this patch sitting on the list here for archive > reference, but not fix it in git. I'm up for this idea and leave the code clean. Michal -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
