Hello Aleksey, Regarding the smoke tests you added, I think it would be better to declare them as "Restriciton: superficial"[0]:
> superficial > The test does not provide significant test coverage, so if it > passes, that does not necessarily mean that the package under test > is actually functional. If a ``superficial`` test fails, it will be > treated like any other failing test, but if it succeeds, this is > only a weak indication of success. Continuous integration systems > should treat a package where all non-superficial tests are skipped as > equivalent to a package where all tests are skipped. > > For example, a C library might have a superficial test that simply > compiles, links and executes a "hello world" program against the > library under test but does not attempt to make use of the library's > functionality, while a Python or Perl library might have a > superficial test that runs ``import foo`` or ``require Foo;`` but > does not attempt to use the library beyond that. > > The other changes looks fine for me, I will just have another final look at the patch you introduced before uploading. I mean, after you add the "superficial" tag to the test, unless you have any objections (feel free to point them if any). Thanks for your work, and sorry for the short reply, I'm not having too much free time on these days. [0] https://salsa.debian.org/ci-team/autopkgtest/raw/master/doc/README.package-tests.rst -- Samuel Henrique <samueloph>
