Bug#872808: [debian-policy] nocheck DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS DEB_BUILD_PROFILES

[Helmut Grohne]

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 07:23:14PM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> I also suspect that given DEB_BUILD_PROFILES=nocheck implies
> DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck, the same should be true for nodoc?

Like DEB_BUILD_PROFILES=nocheck does *not* imply
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck (you must set the latter explicitly),
DEB_BUILD_PROFILES=nodoc does *not* imply DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nodoc.

In general, I think that this historic split into options and profiles
is unfortunate. If we were to restart now, we'd likely remove nocheck,
nodoc and maybe also nostrip from DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS and use
DEB_BUILD_PROFILES exclusively. That's not where we are unfortunately.

Arguably, the same responsibility we require for nocheck should be
applied to nodoc. Given that the nodoc option has a much lower adoption,
I am in favour of simply deprecating it. We should also remove the
"nodocs" option from the archive while at it.

Furthermore, I question the usefulness of nodoc. Since -doc packages are
generally arch:all, most often you can skip them by doing an arch-only
build. In the cases where documentation is stuffed into arch:any
packages, the option modifies package contents. As such, you can no
longer tell whether your modified package correctly satisfies its
reverse dependencies (that may use parts of the documentation other than
/usr/share/doc/). As such the nodoc option/profile is generally
considered "unsafe". Given that you cannot simply rebuild the world with
nodoc active, I have yet to encounter a practical use of nodoc.  It
seems to be a futile exercise in increasing complexity at present.

Whatever the outcome to the relevant questions is, consensus is not what
we have now.

Helmut

Bug#872808: [debian-policy] nocheck DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS DEB_BUILD_PROFILES

[Ghislain Vaillant]

On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:07:13 +0200 Helmut Grohne  wrote:

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 03:37:35PM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIÈS wrote:
> index f706a13..d3d868c 100644
> --- a/policy/ch-source.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
> @@ -465,7 +465,8 @@ The meaning of the following tags has been standardized:
>  
>  ``nocheck``

>  This tag says to not run any build-time test suite provided by the
> -package.
> +package. This tag could be also specified using 
> +   ``DEB_BUILD_PROFILES`` variable with nocheck flag
>  
>  ``nodoc``

>  This tag says to skip any build steps that only generate package

The build profile spec[1] says that you must add nocheck to
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS when adding the nocheck profile.

> @@ -531,7 +532,7 @@ order to make it work for your package.
>  
>  build:

>  # ...
> -ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
> +ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS $DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)))
>  # Code to run the package test suite.
>  endif
>  


This is unnecessary by the above comment.


I also suspect that given DEB_BUILD_PROFILES=nocheck implies 
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck, the same should be true for nodoc?


Ghis

Bug#872808: [debian-policy] nocheck DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS DEB_BUILD_PROFILES

[roucaries bastien]

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:14 PM, Jonathan Nieder  wrote:
> Hi Bastien,
>
> Bastien ROUCARIÈS wrote:
>
>> I think the following patch is needed even if profiles are not fully 
>> specified.
>> Maybe an example about nodoc and help2man will also help. The nocheck should
>> check both BUILD_OPTIONS and BUILD_PROFILES. It will help when implementing 
>> as
>> policy profiles
>>
>> diff --git a/policy/ch-source.rst b/policy/ch-source.rst
>> index f706a13..d3d868c 100644
>> --- a/policy/ch-source.rst
>> +++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
>> @@ -465,7 +465,8 @@ The meaning of the following tags has been standardized:
>>
>>  ``nocheck``
>>  This tag says to not run any build-time test suite provided by the
>> -package.
>> +package. This tag could be also specified using
>> +   ``DEB_BUILD_PROFILES`` variable with nocheck flag
>>
>>  ``nodoc``
>>  This tag says to skip any build steps that only generate package
>> @@ -531,7 +532,7 @@ order to make it work for your package.
>>
>>  build:
>>  # ...
>> -ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
>> +ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS $DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)))
>>  # Code to run the package test suite.
>>  endif
>
> I am all for starting small in documenting build profiles (perhaps by
> documenting DEB_BUILD_PROFILES before the Build-Depends syntax) but it
> is possible to go too small.  This patch doesn't give context for what
> DEB_BUILD_PROFILES means and it makes policy harder to understand.
>
> In other words, if a patch
> - described what a build profile is
> - explained the DEB_BUILD_PROFILES environment variable
> - listed which values in that variable are required to be supported
>
> then that would already be enough for me to second it.  This patch
> doesn't do that.
>
> Do you mind if I merge this with bug#757760?

Feel free to do
>
> Thanks,
> Jonathan

Bug#872808: [debian-policy] nocheck DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS DEB_BUILD_PROFILES

[Jonathan Nieder]

Hi Bastien,

Bastien ROUCARIÈS wrote:

> I think the following patch is needed even if profiles are not fully 
> specified.
> Maybe an example about nodoc and help2man will also help. The nocheck should
> check both BUILD_OPTIONS and BUILD_PROFILES. It will help when implementing as
> policy profiles
>
> diff --git a/policy/ch-source.rst b/policy/ch-source.rst
> index f706a13..d3d868c 100644
> --- a/policy/ch-source.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
> @@ -465,7 +465,8 @@ The meaning of the following tags has been standardized:
>  
>  ``nocheck``
>  This tag says to not run any build-time test suite provided by the
> -package.
> +package. This tag could be also specified using
> +   ``DEB_BUILD_PROFILES`` variable with nocheck flag
> 
>  ``nodoc``
>  This tag says to skip any build steps that only generate package
> @@ -531,7 +532,7 @@ order to make it work for your package.
> 
>  build:
>  # ...
> -ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
> +ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS $DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)))
>  # Code to run the package test suite.
>  endif

I am all for starting small in documenting build profiles (perhaps by
documenting DEB_BUILD_PROFILES before the Build-Depends syntax) but it
is possible to go too small.  This patch doesn't give context for what
DEB_BUILD_PROFILES means and it makes policy harder to understand.

In other words, if a patch
- described what a build profile is
- explained the DEB_BUILD_PROFILES environment variable
- listed which values in that variable are required to be supported

then that would already be enough for me to second it.  This patch
doesn't do that.

Do you mind if I merge this with bug#757760?

Thanks,
Jonathan

Bug#872808: [debian-policy] nocheck DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS DEB_BUILD_PROFILES

[Bastien ROUCARIÈS]

Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.0.1.0
Severity: normal

I think the following patch is needed even if profiles are not fully specified. 
Maybe an example about nodoc and help2man will also help. The nocheck should 
check both BUILD_OPTIONS and BUILD_PROFILES. It will help when implementing as 
policy profiles

diff --git a/policy/ch-source.rst b/policy/ch-source.rst
index f706a13..d3d868c 100644
--- a/policy/ch-source.rst
+++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
@@ -465,7 +465,8 @@ The meaning of the following tags has been standardized:
 
 ``nocheck``
 This tag says to not run any build-time test suite provided by the
-package.
+package. This tag could be also specified using 
+   ``DEB_BUILD_PROFILES`` variable with nocheck flag
 
 ``nodoc``
 This tag says to skip any build steps that only generate package
@@ -531,7 +532,7 @@ order to make it work for your package.
 
 build:
 # ...
-ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
+ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS $DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)))
 # Code to run the package test suite.
 endif
 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.