On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 03:39:58PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 21:09:31 +0200, Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > Hello Debian policy, Ancient policy [1] frowned upon running > > automated check of runtime behavior of packages in debian/rules to > > save time for the autobuilders, and say that such test should be run > > by maintainers manually before uploading. > > Since this is not in policy anymore, this is not relevant.
So you confirm it has been removed from policy ? Great! [The full text of my email to debian-policy can be found at <http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2003/debian-policy-200310/msg00028.html> ] > > I see two possibility to implement this proposal: > > > 1°) Let maintainers run tests in the build or binary target. > > Eventually we add a notest DEBBUILD_OPTION to disable it. > > > 2°) We add a test target in debian/rules. Autobuilders will need to > > be modified to take advantage of this. We can then go farther and > > implement special testing facility. > > > I am sorry for the long post, but I do believe we can make toolchain > > transitions and release easier with a proper automated test > > architecture for the autobuilder. > > Umm, this is the wrong list. Development issues belong on > -devel, not on -policy; follow ups set. Thanks Manoj. It was my plan to move that to -devel once the issue above was cleared up. > For the record, flex runs an extensive test suite at build > time, as do as many of my other packages as I have had time to create > tests for (kernel-package; the old pkg-order, etc). > > If developer routinely add tests to the build option we do not > need to modify anything. If you can persuade people that adding a new > target to the rules file is better, we can perhaps have both -- it > would be easy enough to call the test target from the build target > itself. My first goal is to persuade developers that running tests is worthwhile. For the implentation I have mainly 3 questions: 1) Do porters and autobuilders admins want to be able to skip the tests ? 2) Do we need a more featureful test machinery that just running test in the debian/rules build ? 3) Do we want to allow for autorecovery ? If gcc -O2 leads to a broken binary, why not set up debian/rules to automatically retry with gcc -O0 ? Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. [Please CC me on debian-devel if you expect me to comment]
