On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:41:42AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> > 1°) Let maintainers run tests in the build or binary target.
> > Eventually we add a notest DEBBUILD_OPTION to disable it.
> >
> IMHO this option makes sense. Running tests, as long as they're not
Op vr 10-10-2003, om 12:50 schreef Julian Gilbey:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:41:42AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > > 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 fa
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:41:42AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > 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.
>
> How would you distinguish a failed test from
Hi, Bill Allombert wrote:
> 1°) Let maintainers run tests in the build or binary target.
> Eventually we add a notest DEBBUILD_OPTION to disable it.
>
IMHO this option makes sense. Running tests, as long as they're not TOO
time-consuming, should be an opt-out activity. ;-)
> 2°) We add a test
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.
According to some comment of James Troup and other autobui
5 matches
Mail list logo