From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin Becze Subject: Re: (not) testing Rust packages?! Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2020 09:31:22 -0500 Message-ID: References: <6408622e-feca-c2c3-6bc3-48533336b125@crazy-compilers.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53790) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ivMTB-0008IM-R9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 09:31:32 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ivMTA-0003Sm-IB for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 09:31:29 -0500 Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]:35482) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ivMTA-0003NM-6z for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 09:31:28 -0500 Received: from bell.riseup.net (bell-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (not verified)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 484djn0QZSzFd3w for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 06:31:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bell.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 484djm0lblzJnR9 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2020 06:31:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <6408622e-feca-c2c3-6bc3-48533336b125@crazy-compilers.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org Part of the reason is that bringing tests for a given library can bring in a massive amount of dependencies. So testing only the top level package seemed like the way to go. Maybe we could add testing when encountering problematic rust packages that break often? On 1/25/20 8:38 AM, Hartmut Goebel wrote: > Hi, > > I discovered that most packages in crates-io.scm are not build. I > understand that this is done since they do not produce any useful output. > > But as an side-effect, the packages are not tested either - which might > leave issues undiscovered. > > Is this intended? > > My experience when packaging KDE libraries showed that is does make > sense to actually test the libraries to detect issues early. And there > are quite some possible issue in libraries, e.g. ladoing dynamic libs > from /usr/lib, searching executables in PATH or even worth in a > hard-coded path. >