Re: (not) testing Rust packages?!

[Martin Becze <mjbecze@riseup.net>]

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.
>