GNU bug report logs - #43746
What to do about packages that don't support --without-tests / #:tests? #f setting

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>

Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 14:32:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#43746: closed (What to do about packages that don't support
 --without-tests / #:tests? #f setting)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2020 11:05:01 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Your message dated Sat, 3 Oct 2020 13:03:47 +0200
with message-id <20201003110347.w6ojpcjlui7okfyw <at> pelzflorian.localdomain>
and subject line Re: bug#43746: What to do about packages that don't support --without-tests / #:tests? #f setting
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #43746,
regarding What to do about packages that don't support --without-tests / #:tests? #f setting
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
43746: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=43746
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems
[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: What to do about packages that don't support --without-tests /
 #:tests? #f setting
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:31:36 +0200
[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]
The new package transformation option --without-tests works by setting
#:tests? #f in the specified packages.  But some packages replace
their 'check phase and no longer honor #tests?.  glib for example.

Attached is an attempt to document this current behavior.  Shall I
push it?  Alternatively, it should be documented to write a check
phase that honors #:tests?.  Or the package transformation should be
changed to remove any check phase it finds.

Regards,
Florian
[0001-doc-Explain-why-without-tests-may-fail-with-modified.patch (text/plain, attachment)]
[Message part 5 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43746-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#43746: What to do about packages that don't support
 --without-tests / #:tests? #f setting
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2020 13:03:47 +0200
On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 12:04:37PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > I verified the attached patch fixes glib on the ‘master’ branch.
> If you tested it on ‘master’, you can push it on ‘core-updates’.

Pushed as 0585a0d0d1fe6e334d36e2d851b42b47d6769546.  Thank you!

Closing, since the issue is documented now and fixing *all* other
check phases is generally not worth it.

Regards,
Florian


This bug report was last modified 4 years and 234 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.