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

Re: DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS vs DEB_BUILD_PROFILES: What is right and what is wrong?

Hi Johannes,

thanks for the quick response.

Johannes Schauer wrote:
> > A) lintian by mixing up build tags and build profiles? (Maybe this
> >    mentioning of build profiles was overseen when fixing #889746.)
> I assume this to be the case.

Would be happy to hear, if Mattia sees this the same way.

> > B) dpkg-buildpackages by not setting nocheck in DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS?
> This could be brought to the dpkg maintainers.

Guillem? (If you need the full context:

> > If I want to build something with the build-profile nocheck, do I
> > really have to set DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS myself separately to "nocheck" in
> > addition to "-Pnocheck"? That sounds very counterintuitive to me…
> I fear you currently have to manually set DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck in addition
> to -Pnocheck. The reason is, that currently no tool sets
> DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck if the nocheck build profile is active. This could be
> changed in the future but I know of no such efforts right now.

Ok, this is really not what I expected to be the case, especially
after #889746.

> Also refer to the current documentation of the nocheck build profile under [1].
> It says:
> > No test suite should be run, and build dependencies used only for that
> > purpose should be ignored. Builds that set this profile must also add nocheck
> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/BuildProfileSpec

Thanks for that pointer!

> The only alternative I see that would make this more convenient, would be if we
> rewrite all affected d/rules file to check DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS *and*
> DEB_BUILD_PROFILES when deciding whether or not to run the test
> suite.

This is actually what I just implemented for the package with which I
ran into that issue:

ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS) $(DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)))

> You already discovered that this would be *a lot* of them.

*nod* So if this should be made easier, it's probably at
dpkg-buildpackage or close-by.

> There is a similar issue with the nodoc build profile where one must also
> currently manually supply DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nodoc additionally.

That was quiet likely, yes: different color, same issue. :-)

		Regards, Axel
 ,''`.  |  Axel Beckert <abe@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' :  |  Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `'   |  4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329  6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
  `-    |  1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486  202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE

Reply to: