#3900: [with patch; positive review] make testing an official pickle jar a part
of
"make check"
---------------------+------------------------------------------------------
Reporter: was | Owner: mabshoff
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: blocker | Milestone: sage-3.2
Component: build | Resolution:
Keywords: |
---------------------+------------------------------------------------------
Comment (by GeorgSWeber):
Hi folks,
there does not seem to be any problem with binary distributions, once that
file "pickle_jar.tar.bz2" exists. See line 52 of the "sage-bdist" script,
where among others the complete subtree under /data is copied over.
As for source distributions, essentially the distribution of the file
"pickle_jar.tar.bz2" is not necessary --- it can be (re-)produced from any
source distribution by a (very) short sequence of commands that does not
change. In that sense it's a "build output". For convenience, one might
think about having a make target "make pickle_jar".
But since the doctest introduced by this patch requires the prior
existence of this file "pickle_jar.tar.bz2", and since maybe we don't want
to produce updated pickle jars for each and every Sage version in say the
alpha release cycles, a simplistic spkg could be the solution:
"sage_pickle_jar-X.Y.Z.spkg" containing just the three files "spkg-
install", "SPKG.txt", and "pickle_jar.tar.bz2"; and spkg-install just
issue a single "cp" command.
Then, e.g. Sage version 3.3.2.alpha4 could still contain the spkg
"sage_pickle_jar-3.3.1.spkg".
To make the creation of updated versions of this simplistic spkg easier,
using the existing scripts machinery, it would be advisable not to use the
directory "data/" to store the file "pickle_jar.tar.bz2", but instead the
directory "data/sage_pickle_jar/",
and storing there all these three files. (So a simple "spkg -pkg ..." does
the job of creating the updated spkg.)
Of course the naming could also be "std_pickle_jar" instead, or similar.
I'd volunteer to create and test the needed script "spkg-install" resp.
that simplistic spkg, opening another ticket for it, if someone gives me a
"Yep. Good idea. Go for it!". Then the usual review process would take its
course, and this ticket would depend on that other ticket.
Cheers,[[BR]]
gsw
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3900#comment:9>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage - Open Source Mathematical Software: Building the Car Instead of
Reinventing the Wheel
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
