On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 10:17:04PM +0100, Stefan van der Eijk wrote: > Define "build system". > > It's a mix of cooker & contrib, and never the same (packages being > installed & de-installed all the time). There is little that is going to > make sure that a package built today will have the same functionality as > a package today. It's by sheer coincidence that it goes right most of > the time (ImageMagick and xawtv are recent examples of when it went wrong).
Yeah I understand that. I'm not saying that process couldn't be improved. But you know what I mean... > Package quality can be tested in an automated manner. My rebuilding > scripts check the filelist, provides and requires of packages when they > have been rebuilt. This is information which is readly available by > querying the resulting rpm --> should be easy to implement some kind of > automatic system around this. > > Functionality of packaged software will require manual testing of the > package B4 uploading. I'll be honest, the alpha (unsupported distro) > packages my script uploads are not tested. The packages where I change > the BuildRequires are not tested either. It's not good, I know. I was mostly referring to functionality. But yes package quality can be automated to a degree. But never completly. There will always be errors that slip by the test scripts. > It happens... :-(( But it shouldn't. -- Ben Reser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://ben.reser.org "If you're not making any mistakes, you're flat out not trying hard enough." - Jim Nichols
