On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 12:09:57PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 08:32:51AM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 02:13 +0200, Florian Ragwitz wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 08:07:52PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > <SNIP> > > > > or to include test results in the .deb files and retrieve them after > > > > the build. That latter is what the GCC packages do. > > > > > > I don't like that solution. Users of the package don't care about the > > > test results so it's useless to bloat the packages with them. > > > > Stick the debug files into a seperate -debug package, which nobody will > > install anyway and just consumes some archive space. > > Packages that nobody will install should not be in the Debian archive. -debug > packages only make really sense for a small number of the most high-profile > packages. > > In this case, the extract results from buildd.d.o way is the way to go IMHO. > It can be automated too if really needed if you make sure to output specific > markers before & after the tests run. I think that's the way to go here. Thanks. -Flo -- BOFH excuse #292: We ran out of dial tone and we're and waiting for the phone company to deliver another bottle.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature