Hey Guillem,
Guillem Jover [2016-05-09 3:34 +0200]:
> > But I'm not sure at which point the Xs- prefix disappears, nor when the new
> > field would become official -- is it necessary to check for it here? Or just
> > for 'Testsuite-Triggers'?
>
> This depends on whether the field has had usage
Hey!
On Sun, 2016-05-01 at 11:43:03 -0500, Martin Pitt wrote:
> wow, this took a full year to actually implement, sorry for that. Long
> plain rides are sometimes useful :-)
Bah, a year is nothing! :)
> Guillem Jover [2015-03-10 5:39 +0100]:
> > So given all the above, I'd say:
> >
> >
Hello Guillem, Adam, all,
wow, this took a full year to actually implement, sorry for that. Long
plain rides are sometimes useful :-)
Guillem Jover [2015-03-10 5:39 +0100]:
> So given all the above, I'd say:
>
> Testsuite-Triggers: foo, bar, baz
>
> from the union of all testsuites test
Hey Guillem,
Guillem Jover [2015-03-10 5:39 +0100]:
So given all the above, I'd say:
Testsuite-Triggers: foo, bar, baz
from the union of all testsuites test depends, minus @ and @builddeps@,
without versions, and with alternatives split (i.e. a simple comma
separated package list). If
Hi!
On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 11:00:08 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
Guillem Jover [2015-03-04 10:42 +0100]:
Ah, indeed, making it clear that this is strictly not for dependency
purposes, seems better. It just crossed my mind that it might make sense
to strip the version information from those
On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 10:42:15AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
When I said coalesce any other dependencies I was thinking about the
following situation. Say we have a package with an autopkgtest
testsuite with dependencies «foo (= 1.0), bar», and another newchecks
testsuite with dependencies
Hi!
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 11:15:22 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.17.24
User: autopkgtest-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: autopkgtest
A simpler idea would be to make dpkg-source -b add a new
XS-Autopkgtest-Depends: header, which aggregates all Depends: lines of
Hey Guillem,
Guillem Jover [2015-03-04 9:57 +0100]:
Heh, that reminds me a bit of
http://www.hadrons.org/~guillem/debian/docs/test.proposal.
Wow, 2006! :-)
In any case, yeah, this sounds fine. I've conflicting thoughts about
the field name, on one hand Testsuite-Depends (to match the
Hi!
On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 10:06:42 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
Guillem Jover [2015-03-04 9:57 +0100]:
But then, the test runners will need to parse the specific test case
dependencies, as in this case @ is omitted, so we might as well just
coalesce any other dependencies in the same field.
Hello Guillem,
Guillem Jover [2015-03-04 10:42 +0100]:
Ah, indeed, making it clear that this is strictly not for dependency
purposes, seems better. It just crossed my mind that it might make sense
to strip the version information from those dependencies, and only list
package names, but given
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.17.24
User: autopkgtest-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: autopkgtest
Hello,
Adam and I just discussed how to improve DEP-8 autopkgtest regression
detection on uploading packages. Right now we only run tests for
reverse binary dependencies of a package that got
11 matches
Mail list logo
