test suites, was Re: status report (intermediate)
Thanks for the update. This is great progress. I appreciate all your
effort!
Regarding test suites; you are right that they are pointless if no-one
looks at the results. But if m68k build logs were (once again) made
available at <http://buildd.debian.org/> then there would be an argument
for enabling tests. (Though perhaps it is best if some build machines skip
tests?)
I imagine that pressure for faster turn-around might cause a release
architecture (like hppa) to disable them, but this would not apply to us(?)
Finn
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Dixi quod…
>
> >Status:
> >• eglibc (dirty), gcc-4.4 (dirty), linux-2.6 (currently building)
>
> No change, linux-2.6 still building, but I think this is the last
> flavour (mvme16x, and it’s at net/tipc already so it shouldn’t take
> much longer).
>
> >• elfutils (manually built; pending patching, but can rebuild for unreleased)
>
> I’ll binNMU that as I did the others, then upload to unreleased
> with the others.
>
> >• built 103 binary packages for uploading to unstable
>
> We’re at 134 now, including python2.6.
>
> >I’ll have a look at util-linux again soonish, and quite possibly gcc
>
> Planning to do that this weekend.
>
> >At the moment, gettext is a showstopper for dpkg, which needs to be
>
> Built git, so I think I should have all of gettext’s dependencies,
> sans Java™, which I’ll disable and upload to unreleased, as per
> discussion with the maintainer. However, I rebuild libxml2 and
> glib2.0 (its dependencies) too because they’re quite old. I found
> out I need python2.5 in addition to python2.6 for python-all-dev,
> so building that too.
>
> I’ve set DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck again, because they were taking
> up too much time in some cases. The results for python2.6 don’t look
> 100% good, but neither do they on other architectures, and honestly,
> I don’t believe people look at them or use them really. Also, some of
> the official buildds (e.g. hppa) have it disabled too. I think I’ll
> keep it enabled when building gcc on Ingo’s Amigas, just to have some
> kind of logs and something for people reviewing our patches to go
> over, but concentrate on building building building, especially as
> gcc-defaults in experimental wants gcc-4.5, the linux-2.6 maintainers
> are starting with the next version, etc. and, despite people not wanting
> to upload to unstable m68k fixes due to the freeze, I think right now
> is the time where unstable is the most stable, so it’s perfect for what
> I’m doing, if I don’t mind using unreleased (which I don’t).
>
> bye,
> //mirabilos
>
Reply to: