Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:58:06 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: Julio Merino <julio@meroh.net> Cc: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@fnop.net>, Simon Gerraty <sjg@juniper.net> Subject: Re: Plugging ATF tests into the build and other cleanups Message-ID: <BAAECEB1-99EE-4070-88B6-59684F76A2BB@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CADyfeQVqp9vL3t27dniQutimCVZQ11fzQ5P3byCjCeZ3NNAVsg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CADyfeQU7Y8APwTMDo9aTR2NUi2EBq0ytQ3QcF7Ct3xC7_BatBQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAF6rxgkEPGaM4k%2BL_EdcX0tY%2BjkfvfnkAJwCg27T5QysAJa_ig@mail.gmail.com> <CADyfeQVqp9vL3t27dniQutimCVZQ11fzQ5P3byCjCeZ3NNAVsg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 27, 2013, at 6:31 PM, Julio Merino <julio@meroh.net> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> = wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Julio Merino <julio@meroh.net> = wrote: >>> Hello! >>> The one concern I have here is having to keep track of all tests in >>> tools/build/mk/OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc so that setting >>> WITHOUT_TESTS=3Dno cleans up /usr/tests. This will be a pain to = maintain >>> and a sure source of inconsistencies. If we could special-case this = to >>> make it more automatic, do you have any suggestions? >>=20 >> Is it possible to use the list of current tests and just delete any >> files which are not listed? >=20 > I think what you are suggesting applies to src/ObsoleteFiles.inc, not > tools/build/mk/OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc? Yes. > For deleted tests, I think using src/ObsoleteFiles.inc is fine as > usual. Deleted tests have to be removed no matter what the value of > MK_TESTS is. If that list gets out of hand at some point we could > revisit this, although I'm not sure how you can easily determine the > list of "current tests". AFAIK there is no list in src detailing all > files that are expected to be installed? >=20 > My concern is only about the latter at the moment. When MK_TESTS=3Dno, > /usr/tests should not exist at all and, therefore, a "make > delete-old-files" should wipe it. We can do this as usual, with the > functionality in tools/build/mk/OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc to record > all files to be deleted, or we can do something different to avoid > maintaining the list by hand. A simple "rm -rf ${DESTDIR}/usr/tests" > would suffice, but I'm just wondering if that'd be an acceptable thing > to do. This could delete local files though, unexpectedly.. What if you were = doing local hacking and your tree was blown away for instance? make = delete-old* protects against that today. This point might be a good point to bring up standardizing packaging in = base; I have an idea of how to design this from a make perspective after = dealing with this pain ad nauseam for Isilon--just wouldn't want to do = the work if another effort was underway. I realize this is an orthogonal = goal, but it would simplify this a lot -- I found it an incredibly pain = in the rear trying to figure out the ad hoc release "packaging" system = and how to make tests fit on release ISO images a few months back. I've = CCed bapt@ just in case; I know that bdrewery is on this list and he = might have some input to provide. Thanks! -Garrett=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAAECEB1-99EE-4070-88B6-59684F76A2BB>