Hi, Quoting Sebastian Ramacher (2023-05-24 09:48:31) > mmdebstrap's autopkgtest seem to depend quite extensively on the state of > other packages in the archive. Maybe it would be better to make them as > flaky.
I don't think that would be wise. We do these tests for packages to find out when something breaks and we run those as autopkgtests so that things do not transition to testing when they break other things. Because the mmdebstrap autopkgtest tests so many things it found bugs earlier than many other mechanisms we use for QA. There are packages with autopkgtests depending on many more things than what the mmdebstrap autopkgtest depends on. Marking it as flaky would also be wrong because its output is not random but depends precisely on the state of the archive and produces the same result for the same state every time. Marking it as flaky would just hide problems. I think it's expected that a tool creating Debian chroots has tests that are affected by things happening in the Essential:yes set. > In any case, if you want to have this change in bookworm, be aware that the > window is closing quickly. I do not need this change in bookworm as the change only covers the autopkgtest. The contents of the mmdebstrap binary package are not affected by any of this, so even if this change gets approved it would not change what is shipped in bookworm (except of course the source package itself). I filed this pre-approval because maybe it is important for the release team that autopkgtests pass and thus I prepared for the changes that recently happened in doc-debian as well as in dash and adduser. Thanks! cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
