Le jeudi 24 mars 2011 à 00:31 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit : > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote: > >> Currently even "make quicktest" takes too long to run to be suitable > >> for that task. Leaving out a couple more egregiously slow tests and > >> possibly updating it to use the "-j" switch might make for a usable > >> option. > > > > "-j" will precisely help cover the duration of these long tests. By the > > way, you should use a higher "-j" number than you have CPUs, since some > > tests spend most of their time sleeping and waiting. > > > > "make quicktest" already skips test_io and test_socket, which test > > fundamental parts of Python. I would vote for removing "make quicktest" > > rather than promote such a questionable command. > > I'd be fine with that if we change the -j default to something other > than "1" (e.g. as I suggested elsewhere, the number of cores in the > machine). You mean in the "-j" option itself or in "make test"?
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4