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>