Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add focused, synthetic, future-proof autoconf scripts test #7762

Open
jneira opened this issue Oct 18, 2021 · 4 comments
Open

Add focused, synthetic, future-proof autoconf scripts test #7762

jneira opened this issue Oct 18, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@jneira
Copy link
Member

jneira commented Oct 18, 2021

@Mikolaj suggestion in irc and recorded in #7671

add focused, synthetic, future-proof autoconf scripts test with many sample generated files and/or add tests of compiling newest versions of network, process, time, old-time and any other important autoconf-using packages

Not sure how feasible could be the setup for those tests, specially the first mentioned ones. Otoh network is being tested in the new dogfooding job (see #7742)

To consider.

@jneira
Copy link
Member Author

jneira commented Oct 18, 2021

Maybe the effort should be focused in add ci jobs in essential packages using autoconf using cabal head or at least release candidates, which are available via ghcup and haskell actions
thoughts @Mikolaj? we are already plenty of work to be done here 😉

@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member

Mikolaj commented Oct 18, 2021

Yes, I agree, cheaper is better, because we lack resources. I think it would be even stronger (than focused tests on our side) if a couple of popular packages had CI jobs that:

  • build both with new and old autoconf (later on, with whatever autoconf version with breaking changes is still in use) and
  • build both with pre-generated files and files generated as part of the test.

Newest stable cabal for all 4 modes of test should probably be enough, because we don't plan to change this part and, if autoconf breaks again, we will again try to fix cabal ahead of the changes being picked up by normal packages.

@jneira
Copy link
Member Author

jneira commented Oct 19, 2021

Ok, we could open issues in the chosen packages (particularly network) suggesting those changes in their ci setup

@Mikolaj
Copy link
Member

Mikolaj commented Oct 19, 2021

Some work has already been done in package network by @hasufell: haskell/network#516

I don't know how much is missing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants