[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[PATCH 2/3] autodetect Perl packages

Niko Tyni [2014-09-08 14:24 +0300]:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 01:05:27PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > Which is no surprise; we're moving t/ to a temporary directory and
> > run `prove t/*' from there to make sure that we're testing the
> > _installed_ modules and not the ones from the source (lib/) or the
> > "built" ones (blib/).
> > 
> > Seems like we have a problem here with POD tests :/
> > 
> > (The good thing is that this doesn't affect all packages; in my tests
> > with a dozen or so I've never seen this.)
> Right. So while copying lib/ over too would fix this, it would lose the
> assurance that we're testing the installed package.
> Perhaps a simple 'mkdir $TDIR/lib/' in the smoke runner would work,
> so the POD tests would be run against an empty directory?

Hang on, I think I was wrong in my previous mail: THe "runtime-deps"
test already works, it's the "buildtime-deps" test that fails. That
one probably shouldn't cd away from the original source dir, as I
assume the purpose of that one is to run the upstream tests on the
upstream source?

> We'd effectively skip the POD tests for autopkgtest, which I personally
> find quite acceptable. (In case it's not clear, they are about checking
> documentation syntax and/or function coverage.)

Certainly doesn't harm to skip them, but I wonder if maybe the purpose
of the "buildtime-deps" test isn't quite clear? Is it supposed to run
the upstream tests against the source package (then running POD test
should be done, and it should be run in the full source tree)? If not,
it seems quite redundant with the "runtime-deps" test?


Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)

Reply to: