On Sat, 16 May 2015 21:23:25 +0200 Ole Streicher <olebole@debian.org> wrote: > Hi, > > how does ci.debian.net actually (re-)run the tests? I'm also seeing problems with updated packages not running the tests. The News item on ci.debian.net only lists a handful of packages being tested per day. With the churn through unstable after the release, I would have expected this to be higher. I've made a range of uploads for packages which have been running autotests previously but two of these packages have not been tested since the upload and have now migrated to stretch. One has a false status that the tests fail, despite the version being tested only now existing in stable. http://ci.debian.net/packages/l/lava-dispatcher/unstable/amd64/ This package is marked as failing despite not testing the version which was uploaded on 8th May and which migrated into stretch on 14th May. http://ci.debian.net/packages/l/lava-tool/unstable/amd64/ Should be testing 0.12-1 Yet some other packages uploaded at the same time have been tested. http://ci.debian.net/packages/l/lava-coordinator/unstable/amd64/ 0.1.6-2 was tested on 7th May. http://ci.debian.net/packages/d/django-restricted-resource/unstable/amd64/ (9th May) http://ci.debian.net/packages/d/django-testscenarios/unstable/amd64/ (9th May) So some tests are being done, just not others. > | How often are test suites executed? > | The test suite for a source package will be executed: > | * when any package in the dependency chain of its binary packages > changes; | * when the package itself changes; > | * when 1 month is passed since the test suite was run for the last > time. It seems like these triggers are not quite functioning as described. > Also, if I look on the home page [3], I find just a few tests run > every day, which a bit contradicts the total number of packages > (which just jumped from ~1100 to ~3600 in April or May [4]). > Shouldn't this number be > > Are there currently any problems with debci? Does it really run > continiously? It used to run tests for these packages quite regularly but something does seem to be wrong at some level. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpSsBtl1ofSd.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature