>> For example, with the diff package: >> >> Package: diff - cmp works on identical and different binary or text >> files - diff works on files, directories, normal or 2 column - >> sdiff correctly merges two files - diff3 correctly compares 3 files
"Philip" == Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It seems a shame to have to ask people to do this sort of thing. Yes! Maybe even against policy? [Followups on this to debian-policy, please.] I applaud the ambitiousness of making test suites for debian core packages, but I wonder whether Debian developers should focus the packaging and installation system rather than trying to fix all the bugs in GNU, etc. In other words, I think the test suite should focus, at least at the outset, on implementing the policy and making sure that installation and upgrades go smoothly. Here's a draft of a checklist geared to that: * init scripts, if any, comply with debian policy (probably only 20% do now;) * package does not modify any files from other packages * any installation shell scripts work with /bin/sh -> /bin/ash, or they specifically have #!/bin/bash * any installation perl scripts work w/ perl 5.003 (?) * [de]installation script output complies with policy Another big thing is that the transition from 1.3 to 2.0 is _very_ smooth, which is not the case now. Have we defined the supported upgrade paths? I know this is all a moving target w/ pkg ordering stuff apparently coming in and (?) dselect being dropped as the default installation mechanism. [BTW, I'm not trying to criticize the current state of hamm, I know the freeze is a ways off and there's a lot of instability going on.] .....A. P. [EMAIL PROTECTED]<URL:http://www.onShore.com/> -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
