On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 04:19:29PM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 02:50:12PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 09:38:56AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > Personally, I don't think %check is a good idea at all. > > > > I think the benefit depends on the level of patching the Fedora maintainer > > is doing. If they are shipping just vanilla upstream tar.gz then they can > > have a moderate level of confidence in the functionality of their package > > without tests, since you can assume upstream ran their test before release. > > Upstream may not have run the test on all archs supported by Fedora. > ARM is probably still not something we can assume everyone has. I was > dealing with a test which failed only on 32-bit systems just > yesterday, I didn't notice it until I tried building the package in > koji. Yes indeed, the quality of libvirt upstream on non-x86 in general has directly benefited from the fact that the our Fedora RPMs are running %check on all arches, so generating nice bugs reports for us. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
