<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - cairo 1.14.12 fails test" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104150#c3">Comment # 3</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - cairo 1.14.12 fails test" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104150">bug 104150</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:michael.rice@samsung.com" title="Michael Rice <michael.rice@samsung.com>"> Michael Rice</a> <pre>Thanks for your comments Adrian, I can understand tests not running on a platform that is different from the reference platform. I run 'make test' on everything that provides it as a sanity check before running 'make install'. This is standard operating procedure of my build scripts. The goal is to provide a reference prefix for our projects. The prefix will span several generations of RHEL. There is other software that runs on these systems that precludes updating to the latest release, or even latest this quadrennium. I see from the test/README is a lot of information about why one would run other tests or specific tests in a specific manner. However, it doesn't have (or I glossed over it) a useful suggestion for the minimum set of tests that a) are guaranteed to pass and b) validate that the cairo build is viable. I'm building a mostly unattended build, so comparing index.html isn't _quite_ what I want. I really want a set of tests that if anything fails we do not install. Is there a minimum set that you would recommend that would be universally applicable?</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>