Web lists-archives.com

Re: Help requested: Packages which FTBFS randomly

Vincent Bernat writes ("Re: Help requested: Packages which FTBFS randomly"):
>  ❦ 20 février 2017 21:13 GMT, Ian Jackson <ijackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> :
> > With the correct infrastructure (which is not that hard) the causes
> > can be completely eliminated.  I don't ever experience random build
> > failures of any of my own packages and if I did I would hunt them down
> > with a vengeance.[1]
> Good for you.
> https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rbuild/unstable/armhf/autopkgtest_4.3.rbuild.log

Thanks for the reminder that I should probably ask to be removed from
Maintainers for that package.  Martin Pitt has been doing most of the
work, I don't seem to be seeing eye to eye with him lately.[1]]

> It's also quite easier to not have a problems with reliable tests when
> most of your packages don't have tests.

I didn't say all my tests were reliable.  Did you miss my mention of
the dgit test suite ?  I know quite what it's like to have a heisenbug
in the test suite, in a program which you don't maintain, and whose
upstream denies that there can possibly be any races.[2]

There is no excuse for leaving an unreliable test as an FTBFS.
They're a nuisance for QA folks, trouble for downstreams, and a
landmine for users.


[1] https://bugs.debian.org/833407

[2] Luckily another upstream developer eventually came to the rescue
and now the failure probability is down to about one in 10-20 runs of
dgit's adt tests.