* Andreas Tille , 2014-04-03, 08:54:
@builddeps@ does include make.
Please explain is that in the python-pysam example this is actually NOT
the case since
[...]
-Depends: @, python-pysam-tests, samtools
+Depends: @, python-pysam-tests, samtools, make
Restrictions: allow-stderr
this fixed
Hi Stephen,
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 07:41:29PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> >
> > For sure make is not in @builddeps@ since it is build-essential ... which is
> > actually my point.
>
> See the documentation:
>
> `@builddeps@' will be replaced by the package's Build-Depends:,
> Build-De
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 15:33:06 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:47:45AM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 08:35:33 +0100, Andreas Tille
> > wrote:
> > > In other words what we can see in the log above conflicts with the
> > > documentation if ma
Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:47:45AM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 08:35:33 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:54:03PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > > > Moreover I observed another issue with autopkgtest which is quite
> > > >
Hello Stephen,
Stephen Kitt [2014-03-25 0:45 +0100]:
> > Recent versions of autopkgtest now ship the new
> > /usr/share/doc/autopkgtest/README.running-tests.gz which I hope
> > explains the use cases and how to run them.
>
> It does explain the various use cases, but I found auto-package-testing
Hi,
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:10:23 +, Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Stephen Kitt writes ("Re: DEP8 tests using the built package source"):
> > (Hi Ian, I'm adding you to the discussion since I'm talking about changes
> > to DEP8. I've snipped the exchang
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 08:35:33 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:54:03PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > > Moreover I observed another issue with autopkgtest which is quite
> > > astonishing to me: In bug #741274 it was reported that the autopkgtest
> > > would fa
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 08:24:15 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Stephen Kitt [2014-03-19 23:54 +0100]:
> Well, it depends what you want to do. In CI we *always* want to test
> the packages from the actual archive of course. But as a package
> maintainer you may want to (and should) run your autopkgtest f
Stephen Kitt writes ("Re: DEP8 tests using the built package source"):
> (Hi Ian, I'm adding you to the discussion since I'm talking about changes to
> DEP8. I've snipped the exchanges but I hope you can get the gist of it
> without needing to spend time look
* Stephen Kitt , 2014-03-19, 23:25:
FTR, we explicitly make use of that for our toolchain packages: gcc,
binutils, linux, and eglibc have a "bin/true" test with "needs build"
to ensure that whenever we update one piece, the others are still
buildable and their tests succeed (which run at build
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:47:02AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> I hope that ci.debian.net is configured in such a way it uses binary
> packages from the archive.
It is.
--
Antonio Terceiro
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
* Martin Pitt , 2014-03-20, 11:17:
autopkgtest calls dpkg-buildpackage to do the actual package build,
so for adding this to autopkgtest explicitly, we could add a flag for
that and call dpkg-buildpackage --target.
If by "a flag" you meant "a new restriction", then it sounds good to
me. :)
I
* Martin Pitt , 2014-03-20, 07:51:
I'm happy to add a stanza to its documentation to avoid it for
packages which take a nontrivial amount of time to build; does that
sound like an acceptable compromise?
It does indeed, with Jakub's idea of copying only the required code to
$ADTTMP too.
Done n
Jakub Wilk [2014-03-19 11:52 +0100]:
> >autopkgtest calls dpkg-buildpackage to do the actual package
> >build, so for adding this to autopkgtest explicitly, we could add
> >a flag for that and call dpkg-buildpackage --target.
>
> If by "a flag" you meant "a new restriction", then it sounds good to
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:54:03PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> ...
Thanks for the clarification / sharing your opinion.
> > Moreover I observed another issue with autopkgtest which is quite
> > astonishing to me: In bug #741274 it was reported that the autopkgtest
> > would fail an
Stephen Kitt [2014-03-19 23:54 +0100]:
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 13:49:52 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:47:02AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > > Long answer:
> > >
> > > You can declare that a test needs to be run from a built source
> > > tree. Then the test runner will bu
Stephen Kitt [2014-03-19 23:25 +0100]:
> > > > Wouldn't it make sense to change DEP8 to encourage building
> > > > whatever is strictly required for the tests, and perhaps drop
> > > > "build-needed" altogether?
> >
> > I wouldn't want to drop build-needed, as it only complicates things
> > for th
Hi Andreas,
On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 13:49:52 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:47:02AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > Long answer:
> >
> > You can declare that a test needs to be run from a built source
> > tree. Then the test runner will build the package. But that doesn't
> >
On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 12:01:18 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Antonio Terceiro [2014-03-17 9:59 -0300]:
> > On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:27:06PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> FTR, we explicitly make use of that for our toolchain packages: gcc,
> binutils, linux, and eglibc have a "bin/true" test with "ne
Hi Jakub,
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:47:02AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> [Adding autopkgtest-devel@ back to To. I fear that Martin is not
> subscribed to -mentors@.]
Thanks. If you answer on autopkgtest-devel@ only please CC me.
> * Andreas Tille , 2014-03-19, 10:47:
> >>autopkgtest calls dpkg-b
* Martin Pitt , 2014-03-18, 12:08:
the alternative of building the required bits inside the tests itself
is not appealing either, because to do that you would typically need
to add stuff to Depends.
It would be great if there was a way to tell the test runner to run a
dedicated debian/rules t
[Adding autopkgtest-devel@ back to To. I fear that Martin is not
subscribed to -mentors@.]
* Andreas Tille , 2014-03-19, 10:47:
autopkgtest calls dpkg-buildpackage to do the actual package build, so
for adding this to autopkgtest explicitly, we could add a flag for
that and call dpkg-buildpack
Hi Matrin,
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:08:02PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
>
> autopkgtest calls dpkg-buildpackage to do the actual package build, so
> for adding this to autopkgtest explicitly, we could add a flag for
> that and call dpkg-buildpackage --target.
H, it seems I had a bad preconce
Hello all,
Antonio Terceiro [2014-03-17 9:59 -0300]:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:27:06PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 17:39:20 -0300, Antonio Terceiro
> > What bothers me is that the current DEP8 spec says that packages can rely on
> > having their source tree in the built
Jakub Wilk [2014-03-18 11:37 +0100]:
> What I've been doing to my packages, is to copy all the bits
> necessary to run tests from the package directory to $ADTTMP, then
> chdir to $ADTTMP, and run tests from there. This greatly mitigates
> the risk of accidentally testing against not-installed code
* Antonio Terceiro , 2014-03-17, 09:59:
You have to make sure that the any tests will run against the code
that is _installed_ and not against the code that was just built.
What I've been doing to my packages, is to copy all the bits necessary
to run tests from the package directory to $ADTTMP
Adding the autopkgtest-devel list to involve the current maintainers.
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:27:06PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> (Hi Ian, I'm adding you to the discussion since I'm talking about changes to
> DEP8. I've snipped the exchanges but I hope you can get the gist of it
> without need
(Hi Ian, I'm adding you to the discussion since I'm talking about changes to
DEP8. I've snipped the exchanges but I hope you can get the gist of it
without needing to spend time looking anything else up!)
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 17:39:20 -0300, Antonio Terceiro
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 08:39:
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:41:15 -0300, Antonio Terceiro
> wrote:
> > not subscribed to debian-mentors, please Cc: me explicitly if you still
> > need my input.
>
> Noted, thanks for noticing :-).
Thanks to Jakub for pinging me on IRC a
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:41:15 -0300, Antonio Terceiro
wrote:
> not subscribed to debian-mentors, please Cc: me explicitly if you still
> need my input.
Noted, thanks for noticing :-).
> >> Stephen Kitt , 2014-03-15, 14:53:
> > A local adt-run using an unstable chroot or qemu works, whether run fr
not subscribed to debian-mentors, please Cc: me explicitly if you still
need my input.
>> Stephen Kitt , 2014-03-15, 14:53:
> A local adt-run using an unstable chroot or qemu works, whether run from the
> built or unbuilt source tree. But the tests fail on ci.debian.net; as far as
> I can tell it
* Stephen Kitt , 2014-03-15, 14:53:
==> debian/tests/control <==
Tests: check
Restrictions: needs-root build-needed rw-build-tree
Depends: @builddeps@
It's probably unrelated to the problem you're observing, but this
Depends is certainly incorrect. The specification says that “tests
must test
Hi,
I maintain libevdev, which includes tests which need to be run as root in the
built source tree:
./configure
sudo make check
Obviously this means I can't run the tests during the standard build, but
Michael Terry from Canonical pointed out that DEP8 tests would be appropriate
(https://bugs.l
33 matches
Mail list logo
