Re: Bits from the Security Team (for those that care about bits)
On Monday 24 January 2011, Iustin Pop wrote:
> This is a very good idea, but I think it could be taken two steps
> further. These are just some ideas I have but did not explore in
> depth, so take them with a grain of salt.
>
> First, tests run during a package build are good, but they do not
> ensure, for example, that the package as installed is working OK.
> I've been thinking that (also) providing tests to be run after the
> package is installed (and not on the build results) would be most
> useful in ensuring that both the build process and the packaging
> is correct.
>
> Second, README.test are designed for human consumption, whereas a
> standardisation of how to invoke the tests would allow for much
> more automation. E.g. piuparts would not only be able to test that
> the install succeeds, but the automated tests also work.
>
> Of course, these would be useful only for some classes of packages,
> but for those they would be of much help. I have something like
> this in one package of mine, and it gives me a lot of confidence
> while doing packaging changes.
FWIW, Ubuntu has a regression test suite:
https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol/qa-regression-
testing/master
I didn't have a chance to look at it, yet, though.
Cheers,
Stefan
Reply to: