Re: ghostscript testing
On 25/03/2019 16:11, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> I prepared an update for ghostscript.
> Even if we recently rebased to the latest upstream in jessie, the
> upstream patches did not apply cleanly and I did my best to replicate
> the changes.
> Note: we ship a 9.26*a* version which upstream does not provide publicly
> AFAICS (plus it was dfsg-modified), but the conflicts are due to
> upstream's master branch.
> Upstream seems to keep their test suite private. The documentation
> reference a "smoke.ps" file that was removed years ago, and even then it
> depended on PS files that I cannot locate.
> Is there a known test suite for ghostscript?
> (or maybe we should just wait for some 9.26
[hit a shortcut by accident]
(or maybe we should just wait for some 9.26b and backport it?)