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

Previous Next

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>
Subject: bug#43746: closed (Re: bug#43746: What to do about packages that
 don't support --without-tests / #:tests? #f setting)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2020 11:05:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your bug report

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

which was filed against the guix package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 43746 <at> debbugs.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: 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

[Message part 3 (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 4 (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)]

Previous Next

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