Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 09:36:19AM +0000, Julian Gilbey wrote: > With the increasing prevalence of DEB_BUILD_PROFILES, it would seem to > make sense for dh_auto_test to skip any tests if "nocheck" appears in > either DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS or DEB_BUILD_PROFILES.
That's an ongoing source of confusion.
The build profile specification very clearly says that if you specify
"nocheck" in _PROFILES your ***ALSO MUST*** add it to _OPTIONS as well.
That's *exactly* so that you can only check _OPTIONS and be done with
it.
Also please keep in mind that _OPTIONS is a Policy-defined interface,
whereas _PROFILES is not.
> Otherwise, it is very
> easy to end up with a situation where a package fails to build if
> DEB_BUILD_PROFILES=nocheck but DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS is empty
Yes, that's to be expected, why are you surprised?
> To guard
> against this is every package by conditionally overriding dh_auto_make
> is silly; it would be much better to do it centrally.
You should instead make sure that whatever is invoking the build does so
correctly, shouldn't you?
If debhelper were to start checking for _PROFILES=nocheck, I'd rather
it *only* checked for build profile specification compliance and error
out as appropriate.
If you have other opinions about it, IMHO they would be better
redirected into making the build profiles part of the Policy, and while
on that figure out a nice way to solve the partial duplication that is
around _PROFILES and _OPTIONS.
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
