On Wed, 2016-07-13 at 10:21 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 13/07/16 08:21 +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 03:45:54PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > > > Bodhi works at the source package level, not binary package level. > > That's irrelevant. If a source package only provides a library for > other packages to link against then testing it is non-trivial. > > Something like libjpeg-turbo is easily testabel because it includes > some command-line utilities that can be tested (e.g. run djpeg to > decompress a JPEG file). Not all packages that install libraries > include such utilities. > > > > > I think Jon's point was with respect to the scope of testing. With > > glibc (or libstdc++ that Jon would be concerned with), an ideal set of > > sanity tests would cover the library as well as its development files*. > > Right, or Boost. Boost has no applications you can test, it only > installs libraries and headers. 31 shared libraries, from 25 almost > entirely unrelated sub-libraries. And several times that number of > header-only sub-libraries. > > To test that properly you'd need to compile several dozen applications > that use different pieces of Boost and check they link and run OK. > > That was my point. Testing a package that only provides a library for > other packages to build against is non-trivial. Ah, I see what you meant. What I usually suggest for library testing is to run whatever applications you have installed that use that library, and make sure they work for what you usually do with them. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
