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

implicit debian/tests/control files

On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 07:22:46AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Niko Tyni [2014-09-11 22:55 +0300]:

> > However, I'm somewhat against including the Testsuite headers without a
> > debian/tests/control file, as that could actually break other (current
> > or future) implementations.
> I think one way to get that "mass-run" effect without breaking the
> spec would be to use a different XS-Testsuite: value. How about
> "autopkgtest-auto-perl"? We'd use something similar for
> "autopkgtest-auto-ruby". Test runners which use another implementation
> which doesn't provide these would then just not run Perl/Ruby
> packages, ci.d.n. could just watch out for the additional tags once it
> updates to autopkgtest 3.5, and we satisfy the spec that
> "Testsuite: autopkgtest" packages need to have a debian/tests/control.

That's a nice idea that resolves my concerns, particularly if it
gets documented. Antonio's autodep8 makes it even better.

(I'd sort of prefer 'autopkgtest-pkg-perl', or even 'autopkgtest/pkg-perl'
for cleaner namespace separation, but I don't really mind.)

We probably don't need all the indirection in the current generic control
file if we fully embrace this route, as there isn't a need to keep the
file immutable any more. But we can easily revisit that later.

The autodep8 interface seems to make the perl vs. ruby choice
automatically, which isn't quite the same thing as spelling it out in
the Testsuite header. Of course, teaching it to map the Testsuite name
to the relevant test control file variant should be trivial.

> > Similarly, for packages that don't pass their tests and need tuning,
> > I'd like to add a control file as part of the tuning process even if it's
> > unmodified from the default one. (We have some additional test-specific
> > tuning knobs that don't need modifying d/t/control.)
> Ah, do they work by placing additional config files into d/t/? 

Yeah, that's right. I think we'll probably place them all in a
debian/tests/pkg-perl directory soon, but currently they're cluttered
in the main debian/tests/ directory.

> Whether you want to add the control file is your call of course. As the
> autopkgtest maintainer I'm pretty much following your needs here (and
> just moderate a bit to ensure that it doesn't collide with other
> goals/robustness/etc.).

I guess with the Testsuite: autopkgtest-auto-perl thing I'd be fine with
omitting the test control file if it's unmodified from the generic one.
Niko Tyni   ntyni at debian.org

Reply to: