On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:44:59PM -0400, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> On 6/17/2010 8:37 PM, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> > 1.6.12 tarballs are up for testing and signing. The magic revision is r955767:
> > http://people.apache.org/~hwright/svn/1.6.12/
> >
> > As usual, signatures from full committers please send back to me.
> > Testing by enthusiastic users is also welcomed (but remember that this
> > is not yet a blessed release, with all that that implies). If you are
> > a package maintainer, please do not included this release in your
> > distribution until after it has been formally released.
> >
> > I'd like to collect all the signatures in time to do a release by June 21.
> >
> > -Hyrum
> I plan to start doing maintenance for devel/subversion port in FreeBSD.
> The maintainer is etime and burnt out.
>
> What people usually do for tests of subversion ?
>
> The compile portion is easy.
See the various svn-check-* targets in
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/tools/dev/unix-build/Makefile.svn
They cover all possible testing combinations of RA layers and FS backends,
plus bindings (except python ctype bindings).
Anyway, it is what I use to run the tests for releases I sign:
mkdir ~/svn
cd ~/svn
svn export http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/tools/dev/unix-build/
ln -s unix-build/Makefile.svn GNUmakefile
gmake TAG=1.6.12 svn-check
And then I manually make sure the tarball matches the tag (I could
make the Makefile handle tarballs directly, but, you know, time, life,
the universe, and everything...)
I also maintain the OpenBSD port. During 'make regress' in this port,
I run a simple 'make check' (which only tests ra_local) and bindings
tests. This is OK since I've already run all the other [http,svn x bdb,fsfs]
tests on the same system for Subversion's upstream release anyway.
And it's quite cumbersome for 'make regress' to start servers.
The OpenSUSE packages also do a simple 'make check' and bindings tests.
They used to do more but then I got mail from novell asking what I was
doing putting so much load on their build farm...
Anyway, if you need help running tests within the FreeBSD ports framework,
I am happy to help, just let me know (the OpenBSD port should provide
a good example).
Oh, and BTW, IIRC FreeBSD is maintaining a subversion-freebsd port
which has a patch that adds custom keyword support to SVN (for $FreeBSD$).
I would really, really, prefer FreeBSD to contribute their work upstream
rather than maintaining a patch against Subversion (the 1.7 upgrade will
probably be a pain for you if you still have to maintain the patch at
that point). If you get a chance to poke the right people about this,
that would be appreciated. I've been making OpenBSD contributions based
on code from FreeBSD and it's impossible for me to automatically get the
$FreeBSD$ keyword expanded in my svn checkout since I don't run FreeBSD.
So as another side-effect of the patch, a non-critical but interesting
piece of information ("which version of the file is this based on?") gets
lost easily as FreeBSD code gets integrated into other BSDs.
I would be glad to review patch submissions related to this.
Thanks,
Stefan
Received on 2010-06-18 10:28:41 CEST