Subject: Re: crypto library checks [was: 1.8.0]

Re: crypto library checks [was: 1.8.0]

From: Tor Arntsen <>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 14:31:20 +0200

On 27 October 2016 at 13:37, Kamil Dudka <> wrote:
> On Thursday, October 27, 2016 11:15:30 Peter Stuge wrote:

>> Why do you prefer running more checks when a failure can't be avoided
>> anyway?
> I often debug build issues remotely on distro builders, Travis CI, etc.
> It is better for me to know as many problems as possible from a single
> build attempt than discovering the problems one by one and having to
> wait for the results in each iteration.

Ah, batch process vs. interactive.. well, that makes sense. Your
earlier suggestion about somehow getting a summary of failures at the
end would give the best of both worlds. I'm not sure if I've seen that
in practice though - is it something that is reasonably easy to set up
with autoconf? I still haven't acquired much understanding of
autoconf, after all this years of fiddling with it.
Received on 2016-10-27