On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 07:44:33PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 03:06:05PM +0100, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 10:17:44PM -0500, Todd Zullinger wrote: > > > Looking through the build logs for the fedora git packages, I noticed it > > > was missing the GPGSM prereq. > > > > Just curious: how did you noticed the missing GPGSM prereq? > > > > I'm asking because I use a patch for a good couple of months now that > > collects the prereqs missed by test cases and prints them at the end > > of 'make test'. Its output looks like this: > > > > https://travis-ci.org/szeder/git/jobs/490944032#L2358 > But it looks from the output like it just mentions every prereq that > wasn't satisfied. I don't think that's particularly useful to show for > all users, since most of them are platform things that cannot be changed > (and you'd never get the list to zero, since some of them are mutually > exclusive). The idea was that people might notice when a new unmet prereq pops up all of a sudden, because they modified something on their setup, or because a new prereq was recently introduced, e.g. PERLJSON. Or they might notice that a prereq necessary to test a fundamental feature is missing on their setup that they haven't been aware of before, e.g. TTY.
