> "Sean" == Sean Whitton writes:
Sean> Hello,
Sean> On Wed 26 Apr 2023 at 04:48PM -06, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> I guess that's consistent with RFC 2119. And RFC 2119 SHOULD
>> means that the requirement is RECOMMENDED, and an implementation
>> that does not follow the SHOUL
Hello,
On Wed 26 Apr 2023 at 04:48PM -06, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I guess that's consistent with RFC 2119.
> And RFC 2119 SHOULD means that the requirement is RECOMMENDED, and an
> implementation that does not follow the SHOULD needs to have a reason
> for not following the recommendation.
Just to
On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 16:48:43 -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Simon> - the nocheck option SHOULD NOT alter the contents of any
> Simon> binary package
>
> I agree this is true--possibly even as a MUST--for the nocheck build
> profile, but
> I think DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS are allowed to modify the con
On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 23:24:58 +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
> On 2023-04-26 20:42, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > It's just
> > less common (although certainly not unheard of) for test suites to have
> > test-suite-only build dependencies (as opposed to test-only runtime
> > dependencies, which are ve
> "Simon" == Simon McVittie writes:
Simon> On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 18:59:46 +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
>> Policy 4.9.1 states that (emphases mine): * "[nocheck] says not
>> to *run* any build-time test suite" * "[nodoc] says to skip any
>> *build* steps"
>>
>> My
On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 18:59:46 +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
> Policy 4.9.1 states that (emphases mine):
> * "[nocheck] says not to *run* any build-time test suite"
> * "[nodoc] says to skip any *build* steps"
>
> My reading with regards to 'nocheck' was that where tests were available
> an
Hi Russ,
thanks for the fast reply!
On 2023-04-26 20:42, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Christian Kastner writes:
>> I thought this line of reasoning was sound, but then I remembered the
>> 'nodoc' tag and now I am no longer sure. Maybe I'm taking the 'nocheck'
>> description too literally.
>
> I think
Christian Kastner writes:
> Policy 4.9.1 states that (emphases mine):
> * "[nocheck] says not to *run* any build-time test suite"
> * "[nodoc] says to skip any *build* steps"
> My reading with regards to 'nocheck' was that where tests were available
> and needed to be built, then they should
8 matches
Mail list logo
