[Spice-devel] [PATCH spice-streaming-agent v3 3/3] mjpeg-fallback: unittest for the options parsing

[Lukáš Hrázký]

On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 11:59 +0100, Victor Toso wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:45:33AM +0100, Lukáš Hrázký wrote:
> > > That tests are not enabled by default. If we enable it by default
> > > here I would expect to do the same for other Spice components.
> > 
> > Ok, but I'm somewhat confused here. Enabling the tests is during
> > packaging - you run `make check`. Which means we are talking about...
> > Fedora packaging? Or am I getting something wrong?
> 
> I'm talking about releases and the configure script with default
> options. Today we don't have tests enabled by default in our
> tarballs.
> 
> 1) wget https://www.spice-space.org/download/gtk/spice-gtk-LATEST.tar.bz2
> 2) tar -xvf spice-gtk-LATEST.tar.bz2
> 3) cd spice-gtk-0.34
> 4) ./configure
> 5) make
> # no tests, no extra dependencies.

Thanks for the example, made it clear. I think you are mistaken here,
though:

wget https://www.spice-space.org/download/gtk/spice-gtk-LATEST.tar.bz2
tar -xvf spice-gtk-LATEST.tar.bz2
cd spice-gtk-0.34
./configure
make check

(the only difference being calling `make check` at the end)

Here you have the tests. It is up to the packaging to explicitly call
the tests. Many packaging tools automatically detect there is a make
check target and call it at the appropriate point during the packaging.

So you don't need to explicitly enable the tests in the tarball in any
way. The only issue, which we are discussing here, are extra testing
dependencies, that the tests may have and that you check for in
configure.

So if someone builds the package and does not intend to run the tests,
the configure script may still require him to install the tests
dependencies.

And as I break it down here for myself as well, I think I was wrong
with my previous argumentation for the different behaviour based on
presence of Catch in the system. Because the make check target will be
there anyway, it will just be broken if the dependency isn't there.
Correct? So in the unlikely case I'm not missing anything anymore, I
suppose Christophe's suggestion is ok. Sorry for the noise :)

Lukas