Re: Request for Rawtran packaging review
Filip Hroch <hroch@physics.muni.cz> writes:
> I added both kinds (build and CI) of the tests. Now, I see that the
> idea wasn't so good because there are no small CR2 files due to the
> race of manufacturers about mega-pixels.
Probably setting the resolution in the camera settings to some very low
number doesn't help since the raw file is saved before any resolution
change is done, right?
You could (if you know the format well enough) try to create a synthetic
raw file, or you could set most of the pixels to zero (that could make
it better compressible). Or just live with the 8 MB tar file, which is
luckily not a problem anymore today.
One point here is however that the CI test as you specified it does not
work: the source directory is readonly during the tests. And the build
environment (namely gcc, make and such) is not installed by default
there, it should be specified in the Depends fields of
debian/tests/control.
Since your package already contains an executable: wouldn't it be better
in the CI test just to create the fits file with rawtran, and then check
some headers (and, if you know it, the content)? You could use f.e. the
"fitshdr" command from wcslib-tools for that. Or astropy.
Could you check this?
> I've problem with interaction of uscan and my ftp (vsftpd). The list
> of files (uscan --debug) is sometimes empty with no reason. This is
> the problem reported also on QA pages.
Sorry, no idea here.
Best regards
Ole
Reply to: