On 2/21/14, 9:25 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > 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. Ditto for e2fsprogs, we found lots of endian bugs that way. (But: OMG, please, no, don't file 1000 bugs demanding new test suites from packagers!) -Eric > Regards, > Daniel > -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
