On 5/27/26 11:42 AM, Richard Purdie via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
On Wed, 2026-05-27 at 14:16 +0000, Daniel Turull wrote:
To help with the updates, allowing ptest to be backported could also
help on finding issues in the recipe updates or CVE backporting.
ptests are not good candidates for backports. We have huge amounts of
problems with them in master, let alone the stable backports. Very few
actually dive in and try and fix the issues in master. The new patches
often seem to be AI generated and contain questionable cod. All my
experience says backporting them is a really bad idea.
Sorry, but definitely no from me.
Sorry for the late reply. I had missed this email.
I agree with Richard. Test cases need to actually test "something". Just
backporting ptests for the sake of more tests doesn't help anyone. It doesn't
test regressions, it doesn't test functionality, and just adds noise to the
reports. (More positive, more negatives and more skips suddenly appear.)
I'm all in favor of adding ptests when something else has been added to a stable
version. I.e. a CVE is fixed in a recipe. If the CVE behavior can be checked
for in a ptest, I would be in favor of adding that ptest and backporting it
where appropriate. (But just the ONE test.)
--Mark
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#2364):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/2364
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/119437109/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
