Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (102 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Non-blocking %check

JFYI, the idea to handle build results and QA results seperate
exists since quite some time. Means being able to switch in repository
or request configurations to accept or not accept QA failures independend
of source changes.

However, it is unlikely that we work on that soon, sorry.

Nevertheless, I think the seperate -testsuite packages are a proper
workaround for many cases. You can still see the results, and still get
build results soon.

On Donnerstag, 20. April 2017, 15:40:29 CEST wrote Ruediger Meier:
On Thursday 20 April 2017, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On 04/20/2017 01:30 PM, Ruediger Meier wrote:
This is a nice idea but it has a few drawbacks:
1.A bad coreutils-testsuite does not seem to prevent automatically
that the coreutils package would be released to the users.

there is still the package maintainer who is repsonsible for
forwarding packages ... so I don't see this danger.

2.coreutils-testsuite is not testing the *same* binaries which we
install finally in the distro. Bugs or inconsistencies in OSB or
rpm could cause that "coreutils" builds broken binaries
but "coreutils-testsuite" looks ok.

That's a valid point though ...

What I would really like is that project's like coreutils would
have a "make check*" target which runs tests against the installed
coreutils.

... it has been like that for quite a while now. I don't know what
was the motivation behind the split, but I can imagine that this
speeded up the build cycles on OBS dramatically.

Yes, the non-testsuite package has less "BuildRequires" to
prevent "unnecessary" rebuilds. But different "BuildRequires" even
increases the probability that the installed and tested binaries could
differ.

IHMO our OBS bootstrapping way to rebuild again and again until
everything converges to reproducable packages is bad especially when we
add such "build cycle optimizations". It makes spec files and tests
very ugly, complicated or even unsafe (e.g. util-linux). It's also a
pain to review submit requests for such packages having duplicated spec
files and changelogs.

Thus said, I'm not against removing 'coreutils-testsuite'. Maybe
it'd be an improvement if only the smaller (faster) 'make check' is
run for the coreutils package while it would run the slower 'make
check-very-expensive' tests in the coreutils-testsuite case.

Have a nice day,
Berny


cu,
Rudi



--

Adrian Schroeter
email: adrian@xxxxxxx

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284
(AG Nürnberg)

Maxfeldstraße 5
90409 Nürnberg
Germany


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups