On Mon, 08 Sep 2014 21:26:54 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > Niko Tyni [2014-09-08 22:03 +0300]: > > Would it be possible / desirable to test run our packages first somehow > > so that they don't become "official failures" yet? We don't really > > know how bad it will be; I'm guessing we might see maybe a hundred or > > two hundred failures, but your guess is as good as mine. I think we've > > only tested the concept with a dozen packages or so at this point. >From my tests today I'm a bit nervous that the number might be even higher ... But we won't know before trying :) > Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. Do you have a list of source > packages? I'd just take something like % grep-available -s Package -FMaintainer pkg-perl-maintainers /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.ch.debian.org_debian_dists_unstable_main_source_Sources | sort -u > I expect most of them to run quite quickly, so perhaps throw > that into an etherpad, we can split that into a couple batches and > just run them locally on our dev machines. I guess my work laptop can > grind through a few hundred tomorrow. Sounds good, thanks. > We might run through all of them, and only keep the ones that succeed > in the whitelist initially, and then do two or three iterations of > fixing the easy cases in pkg-perl-tools? I suspec that after that > we'll quickly get into the long tail of packages which need to be > fixed on a case-by-case basis, Ack. > and for these the XS-Testsuite: marker > can then be added alongside? Hm, is this still needed? I thought that the recent dpkg-* adds it automatically if it finds a debian/tests/control file? Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Bettina Wegner: Klein Zaches
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature