Re: Test suites after build and Build-Depends.
* Lucas Nussbaum [Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:51:24 +0100]:
> On 26/01/09 at 19:26 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > * Lucas Nussbaum [Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:21:54 +0100]:
> > > It's a chicken-and-egg problem: binary deps are not known until
> > > you build the binary package...
> > That is simply not true, and not the case with many of our interpreted
> > languages.
> uh? please explain.
Ok. You package libfoo-ruby. For version 1.0-1, you write in debian/control:
Source: ruby-foo
Build-Depends: debhelper, ruby
Package: libfoo-ruby1.8
Depends: ruby (>= 1.8), libbar-ruby1.8, libmoo-ruby1.8, libquack-ruby1.8
...
Now, version 1.5 comes along, and it adds a testsuite, which is run
using the libtest-me-harder-ruby1.8 package.
So you run the test suite from debian/rules and update debian/control
for 1.5-1 like this:
Source: ruby-foo
Build-Depends: debhelper, ruby, libtest-me-harder-ruby1.8
Package: libfoo-ruby1.8
Depends: ruby (>= 1.8), libbar-ruby1.8, libmoo-ruby1.8, libquack-ruby1.8
...
Except that it does not work, because of course the test suite wants to
run the program, which in turns wants to require 'bar', 'moo', and
'quack'.
So your debian/control ends ups like:
Source: ruby-foo
Build-Depends: debhelper, ruby, libtest-me-harder-ruby1.8, libbar-ruby1.8, libmoo-ruby1.8, libquack-ruby1.8
Package: libfoo-ruby1.8
Depends: ruby (>= 1.8), libbar-ruby1.8, libmoo-ruby1.8, libquack-ruby1.8
...
Which makes Charles Plessy unhappy, and which isn't really solvable
without something akin to control.in, either from debian/rules or,
futuristically, dpkg-dev toolchain.
And then, Build-Depends-Test is something different altogether.
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org
As an adolescent I aspired to lasting fame, I craved factual certainty,
and I thirsted for a meaningful vision of human life -- so I became a
scientist. This is like becoming an archbishop so you can meet girls.
-- Matt Cartmill
Reply to: