Re: rocsparse docs and autopkgtests
Hi Cory,
On 2023-06-06 10:54, Cordell Bloor wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've added packages providing autopkgtests and HTML docs for rocsparse
> [1]. I have not prepared these sorts of binary packages before, so it
> would be useful if someone could take a close look and let me know if
> there's anything I need to correct.
Great work on the -doc package. These are often one of the most
complicated things to create, because of upstream tendencies to rely on
internet access and/or DFSG issues, and the need to patch around that.
I fixed one minor issue, see [1]. Expanding on that, Build Profiles
and DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS are nuanced and the Policy was a bit ambiguous, so
I raised the issue a while ago [2], but I need to document the result in
our own policy.
One issue remains, namely the test data. Your comment in the 0009 patch
says its arch-independent and thus correctly belongs somewhere in
/usr/share, but since the -tests package is arch-specific, the 150MB
data will needlessly be replicated for each arch-specific .deb. From own
experience, ftp-master will balk at this.
The solution is to also create an arch-independent package
librocsparse0-tests-data, and have librocsparse0-tests depend on it.
I would have done so myself but then I wasn't sure if the test data was
SOVER dependent or not. If it is, the install path should be adjusted,
to make different versions co-installable. If it isn't, then the package
name doesn't need the "0", similar to the -dev package. If you let me
know which one it is, I'll adjust accordingly, and upload.
Best,
Christian
[1] https://salsa.debian.org/rocm-team/rocsparse/-/commit/e1c461529a661384f4caf73490b6b297fc709c45
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2023/04/msg00014.html
Reply to: