Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 11:22:23PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: >> * Martin Pitt <mp...@debian.org>, 2014-02-27, 17:38: >> >Tests can now depend on "@builddeps@" which expands to the source >> >package's build dependencies. This is useful if you have many >> >build dependencies which are only necessary for running the test >> >suite and you don't want to replicate them in the test Depends:. >> >> I advise to never use @builddeps@. It's a great way to shoot >> yourself in the foot. :\ > > would you ellaborate?
I would consider it to be a poor test of the built package if packages that were not in Recommends, Suggests or packages specifically needed as a test runner (e.g. python-nose) were being installed. Installing packages other than those ones means that whether the Depends/Recommends/Suggests are complete is not being tested [1]. This is a class of bug that keeps coming up and one of the reasons why autopkgtest tests are so attractive. There is of course another class of tests where correct operation is ensured while other non-required packages are installed (e.g. an alternative implementation etc) but that still isn't build-deps. (I don't know if that's what Jakub had in mind, but that's my 2ยข) cheers Stuart [1] Where possible, separate tests for Depends, Depends+Recommends, Depends+Recommends+Suggests would seem even better to test the graceful failure (or otherwise) in the absence of these related packages. -- Stuart Prescott http://www.nanonanonano.net/ stu...@nanonanonano.net Debian Developer http://www.debian.org/ stu...@debian.org GPG fingerprint 90E2 D2C1 AD14 6A1B 7EBB 891D BBC1 7EBB 1396 F2F7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/lf6ge0$v4h$1...@ger.gmane.org
