From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0D0A138262 for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 11:26:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B9F1C22419B; Tue, 17 May 2016 11:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8853B224197 for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 11:26:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-98-218-46-55.hsd1.md.comcast.net [98.218.46.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mjo) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 795E2340C18 for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 11:26:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for changes for the next EAPI version To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20160516183840.4b241463@gentp.lnet> <20160517084643.GA24972@skade.schwarzvogel.de> From: Michael Orlitzky X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <573AFFCB.8030305@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 07:26:03 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: daa4d2b0-56b6-4993-bdc0-6b2da18a6a65 X-Archives-Hash: c46846f7efa4948a88a28f1ed66ae63a On 05/17/2016 06:01 AM, Pallav Agarwal wrote: > Hi, > You are right, of course. > The target is to standardize something that would encourage maintainers > to actually provide non-upstream scripts to test packages. At the same > time, it should be possible to use those scripts for automated testing > without > human interference. > We already have "emerge --config" which is expected to be run after the install process has completed, so I don't think that this is too much of a stretch. Maybe call the phase "pkg_test" analogous to "pkg_config" and in contrast to "src_test" which runs within the working directory. Then "emerge --test" could run it. I stole the Emacs "test plan" idea for a few Haskell packages: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Haskell/Test_plans These do go a little beyond the scope of unit tests: they check that we installed the package in the right place, that it's available to your ghci interpreter, and that we haven't installed some other library with a name collision. Some of them have predictable output (like when we hash a string), but others might cause some trouble. The expected output for hscolour is "you should see a syntax-highlighted version of Example.hs echoed to your terminal." I don't care what colors show up, as long as that happens. Still, even if it doesn't work in 100% of cases, I think it could be useful. Some people may have inflated ideas of what the stabilization process currently involves. In many cases, it's a compile/execute test with no expected results and that could easily be automated even if it's not the world's best stabilization process.