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

Re: Consistent handling of the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 11:16:53PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 09:46:52PM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:54:29PM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> > > > The size of the test suite is completely irrelevant. Executing a single
> > > > compiled binary will cause any cross build to break, even if it is a
> > > > 1kb no-op.
> > > Attempting to execute a binary not supported by the host will obviously
> > > fail but that is not going to cause the package build to fail
> > > automatically.  A lot of what you've been saying appears to be
> > > predicated on the assumption that it will.
> > In which circumstances would it not cause a failure?
> > dpkg-buildpackage will fail if any command cannot be executed, whether
> > that is because the file or directory does not exist or whether it was
> > because the file was not executable or the wrong architecture. Whether
> > the executable is called by sh, make, libtool or by some other means,
> > the build will fail.
> ...and the resulting error is passed back to the rules file (and the
> rules file doesn't ignore the result of the command itself, for that
> matter).  It's not the execution of the binary that's the problem, it's
> depending on it succeeding that's the problem.
What would be the point of executing a test suite during the build
and not making the build fail if the test suite fails?

Rodrigo Gallardo
GPG-Fingerprint: 7C81 E60C 442E 8FBC D975  2F49 0199 8318 ADC9 BC28

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: