Hi Gabriele, On 02-06-2020 01:47, Gabriele wrote: > Thanks for the report. Please note that nothing has changed in the way > Austin is built and packaged in-between version 1.0.0 and 1.0.1. From > what I can tell from the log, the tests are failing because src/austin > is not found, which would be the case if it's not being compiled from > sources using autotools. Indeed, in the linked logs I have spotted > > autopkgtest [18:07:10]: build not needed
That's because the autopkgtest is not requested to do a build. But it's not doing that because build-needed is not listed in the test restrictions. (But please read on). > My guess is that a build is not needed for a binary package because > the binary should already be there? If so, it probably won't be in > src/, hence the failure. But an autopkgtest should test the installed binaries, not build artifacts. And, your previous versions didn't need it either. > As I said, the way of testing, building, and packaging Austin hasn't > changed across releases, which leads me to think that perhaps > something has changed in the Debian publication pipeline? Having said > that, I'd be happy to try and fix this if you could point me in the > right direction. As I have no clue what austin does and how its tests work, I don't think I can help you much. You'll have to figure out what changed between 1.0.0 and 1.0.1 as the change should really be there. If 1.0.0 is tested, it passes, if 1.0.1 is tested, it fails. Both of them are retried repeatedly, so it's not the "publication pipeline". Once you find out which test got changed/updated, you can probably patch it to test the installed binary. Or, if its also part of the build-time testsuite, you'll have to change the test during autopkgtest. Please avoid adding the build-needed restriction if you can. Paul By the way: you're package also fails to build from source on multiple architectures, see https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=austin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
