Re: mcaller - may be ready
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 07:40:47PM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote:
> > > override_dh_auto_test:
> > > cp -a testdata testdata_save
> > > dh_auto_test
> > > rm -rf testdata
> > > mv testdata_save testdata
> > >
> > > or something like this. While I agree that autopkgtest is more important
> > > than build time test both falvours make sense.
> > Build time tests are very important for apriori (pre-upload) detection
> > of breakages introduced by updates/modifications of reverse
> > dependencies. ratt loses much of its power without these tests.
>
> OK, added.
Good!
> But you might want to check out ruby-team/meta[1] script, which also checks
> for
> autopkgtest breakeages. Admittedly, I've always liked this more.
> Here's the results for this, if you'd like to have a look just as an example
>
> [1]: https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/meta
> [2]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2020/07/msg00160.html
That's all perfect. However, we just have seen that not all team members
are even building in a chroot. My guess is that not everybody is running
autopkgtest before uploading. Thus just running the build time test if
available can at least ensure proper builds.
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2021 at 10:46, Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> wrote:
> > Hmmmm, but this looks like an attempt to access some remote location.
>
> Works now
> https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/mcaller/-/jobs/1716727
Nice.
> > I'm not sure. The *.pkl files do not really look "binary" but rather
> > badly saved UTF-8 code. But I agree that there is a slight chance that
> > ftpmaster will stumble upon it. Thus clarifying how that files were
> > created (=can be changed) makes sense.
>
> Looks like it has been trained with passing the --train argument to
> mCaller.py
> Do you think asking upstream about it, and put the way to reproduce that
> file in d/README.Source can
> help there?
Whatever might be faster out of "asking upstream" or running with --train
argument and make a diff. If the latter works its IMHO relatively safe
to assume that this method was used and mentioning this in d/README.Source
as "it was verified that the data can be reprocuded by" should do the
trick.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: