On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:53:49PM -0000, Nish Aravamudan wrote: > > I see. That doesn't look like a very sane test to me; the test ought > > to test that the output is *correct*, not test that the output matches > > some known bug. Yes, I think patching this test to always check for > > the correct value is appropriate.
> But what is "correct" to an API consumer? That imagemagick always rounds > up? The test code asserts that this is what's correct, I assume with some cause. Really, this is a bad test because it's testing aspects of the imagemagick implementation, not the php-imagick code. Instead of hard-coding an imagemagick version check, it would be better if this test allowed for both buggy and non-buggy versions of imagemagick and accepted either value, given the imperfection of checking version numbers. Or, the test could use values that didn't run into this rounding problem? Since this behavior difference doesn't seem to be relevant to testing the behavior of php-imagick itself. > Then php-imagick will always fail against older version of > imagemagick. For the package, it's acceptable for the test to fail against older versions of imagemagick. For upstream, that's their decision. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1549942 Title: php-imagick failing autopkgtests To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/imagemagick/+bug/1549942/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
