Your message dated Fri, 30 Sep 2016 02:10:48 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#838379: dpkg-dev: Add Testsuite: autopkgtest when a
debian/tests/control.autodep8 exists
has caused the Debian Bug report #838379,
regarding dpkg-dev: Add Testsuite: autopkgtest when a
debian/tests/control.autodep8 exists
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
838379: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=838379
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.18.10
Severity: normal
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Dear Maintainer,
I have a Python package that only contains a d/tests/control.autodep8
file, not a d/tests/control file. This requires the addition of an
explicit Testsuite: autopkgtest-pkg-python header to d/control whereas
the existance of d/tests/control would add this automatically. IWBNI
the same logic applied to d/tests/control.autodep8
- -- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 4.7.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
Versions of packages dpkg-dev depends on:
ii base-files 9.6
ii binutils 2.27-8
ii bzip2 1.0.6-8
ii libdpkg-perl 1.18.10
ii make 4.1-9
ii patch 2.7.5-1
ii tar 1.29b-1
ii xz-utils 5.1.1alpha+20120614-2.1
Versions of packages dpkg-dev recommends:
ii build-essential 12.2
ii fakeroot 1.21-2
ii gcc [c-compiler] 4:6.1.1-1
ii gcc-6 [c-compiler] 6.2.0-4
ii gnupg 2.1.15-3
ii gnupg2 2.1.15-3
ii gpgv 2.1.15-3
ii libalgorithm-merge-perl 0.08-3
Versions of packages dpkg-dev suggests:
ii debian-keyring 2016.09.04
- -- no debconf information
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=s0pk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi!
On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 00:13:44 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Control: severity -1 wishlist
> Control: tag -1 moreinfo
>
> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 13:16:14 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > Package: dpkg-dev
> > Version: 1.18.10
> > Severity: normal
>
> > I have a Python package that only contains a d/tests/control.autodep8
> > file, not a d/tests/control file. This requires the addition of an
> > explicit Testsuite: autopkgtest-pkg-python header to d/control whereas
> > the existance of d/tests/control would add this automatically. IWBNI
> > the same logic applied to d/tests/control.autodep8
>
> There are multiple problems with this request. First that control file
> is not documented in the autopkgtest spec AFAICS, it seems to be
> documented in the autodep8 package though. Knowing what to use as the
> Testsuite value would imply replicating the same logic autodep8 has
> to infer what kind of tests are to be run, with all the Debian specic
> policy that that implies (package names, etc).
>
> (This is very mild annoyance, but every time I see a “depN” reference,
> I've to lookup those names, and we have less than 20 AFAIR, they are
> still very non-intuitive, I'd rather not see those extend. :)
>
> As it stands I don't think I'd want to see this implemented in
> dpkg-dev. Because if such file contained the type of pkg the test are
> supposed to use so that dpkg-dev could pick that up, then one might as
> well spell it instead in the debian/control file?
Given that there's been no compelling arguments put forward, I'm
closing this report. Please feel free to reopen if this changes, I'm
always open to reconsider with good arguments!
Thanks,
Guillem
--- End Message ---
