CATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD should not be enabled by default because it is meant for the development of catch2 itself. It does override some warning-flags of users of catch2 like "Wmissing-braces" which is quite annoying.
*** Bug 893168 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I understand this, there's one major problem: without -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=ON we can't build the testsuite, which is a major loss.
Could you clarify; I don't think I understand? Catch2's testsuite, or some other package? Why would losing Catch2's testsuite be a loss since people won't be developing on the version installed by portage? Or why can't a use flag that other packages require be added?
(In reply to Michael from comment #3) > Could you clarify; I don't think I understand? Catch2's testsuite, or some > other package? Why would losing Catch2's testsuite be a loss since people > won't be developing on the version installed by portage? Because we have packages run their test suite when testing them?
(In reply to Michael from comment #3) > Could you clarify; I don't think I understand? Catch2's testsuite, or some > other package? Why would losing Catch2's testsuite be a loss since people > won't be developing on the version installed by portage? Or why can't a use > flag that other packages require be added? I have removed -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=ON from the ebuild entirely, and the installed files are **identical**. I have also tried -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=OFF, with the same results: -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD has no effect on the installed files. Can you demonstrate that -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD has an effect on the install image?
(In reply to David Seifert from comment #5) > (In reply to Michael from comment #3) > > Could you clarify; I don't think I understand? Catch2's testsuite, or some > > other package? Why would losing Catch2's testsuite be a loss since people > > won't be developing on the version installed by portage? Or why can't a use > > flag that other packages require be added? > > I have removed -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=ON from the ebuild entirely, and > the installed files are **identical**. I have also tried > -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=OFF, with the same results: > -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD has no effect on the installed files. Can you > demonstrate that -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD has an effect on the install > image? So Catch2-3.0.1 definitely has this issue; I attempted to build one of my projects with the installed Catch2 version and verified it failed, edited the Catch2 ebuild to remove the -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=ON option, reinstalled it, and verified my project built. However, Catch2-3.3.2 doesn't have this issue! So this issue is solved by adding the accept_keyword :)
(In reply to Michael from comment #6) > (In reply to David Seifert from comment #5) > > (In reply to Michael from comment #3) > > > Could you clarify; I don't think I understand? Catch2's testsuite, or some > > > other package? Why would losing Catch2's testsuite be a loss since people > > > won't be developing on the version installed by portage? Or why can't a use > > > flag that other packages require be added? > > > > I have removed -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=ON from the ebuild entirely, and > > the installed files are **identical**. I have also tried > > -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=OFF, with the same results: > > -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD has no effect on the installed files. Can you > > demonstrate that -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD has an effect on the install > > image? > So Catch2-3.0.1 definitely has this issue; I attempted to build one of my > projects with the installed Catch2 version and verified it failed, edited > the Catch2 ebuild to remove the -DCATCH_DEVELOPMENT_BUILD=ON option, > reinstalled it, and verified my project built. > > However, Catch2-3.3.2 doesn't have this issue! So this issue is solved by > adding the accept_keyword :) I'll add 3.4.0 and then we'll stabilise that one soon.
The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=9e554b4fc672cc15f1d3fca5845cbd5172850f79 commit 9e554b4fc672cc15f1d3fca5845cbd5172850f79 Author: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2023-07-16 18:12:59 +0000 Commit: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2023-07-16 18:12:59 +0000 dev-cpp/catch: add 3.4.0 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/865207 Signed-off-by: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> dev-cpp/catch/Manifest | 1 + dev-cpp/catch/catch-3.4.0.ebuild | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=6894aea248f27601c324d124b26e31902d146239 commit 6894aea248f27601c324d124b26e31902d146239 Author: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2023-08-12 21:56:48 +0000 Commit: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2023-08-12 21:56:48 +0000 dev-cpp/catch: drop 3.0.1 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/865207 Signed-off-by: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> dev-cpp/catch/Manifest | 1 - dev-cpp/catch/catch-3.0.1.ebuild | 50 ---------------------------------------- 2 files changed, 51 deletions(-)
