X-Original-To: alpine-devel@mail.alpinelinux.org Delivered-To: alpine-devel@mail.alpinelinux.org Received: from mail.alpinelinux.org (dallas-a1.alpinelinux.org [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D785DCCD77 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:12:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com (mail-oi0-f52.google.com [209.85.218.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2D98DC6A85 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:12:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by oigx81 with SMTP id x81so13771249oig.1 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:12:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=fIDDbVMx+fzMR7IrO4QBxjCsg+0w57SA2Ihs7yjyQU0=; b=U26A5E+oxSRn9H/3lrqtlS+hjwVo62elPzOHQZjkWmjB5Y2GM4luulMLqMU19TitPC M1drR1oINgEDQXL3rn0joCAwpSZjE8mIuQGGdOF/7aJgqlLiD+q+UnqSTlJvYpoM6dJw zPyV0Dq1YH98ytv5obcTHTY3ue0Pb6UmYX9iB+OiL5zVKwJb00QeiSj8X+cGGsiv7eo9 MeKxr2sn00T45yKvTKY2VvMMS53Bxb61pgkxFsRUwrSTnIVSstRx4pB1fYpspfnWQ+1V GzG2IKJqbq91v6SatOCMA1RBv3ur1QoLuTF+uoobsRpsBn6qJSk853en54sH1bE1y+48 DoTA== X-Mailinglist: alpine-devel Precedence: list List-Id: Alpine Development List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.121.134 with SMTP id lk6mr17834056obb.51.1435687937207; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:12:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.70.199 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:12:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150630162542.34f46f2a@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:12:17 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Regex compatibility From: Michael Fox <415fox@gmail.com> To: Natanael Copa Cc: alpine-devel Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01536a588172560519c0251a X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP --089e01536a588172560519c0251a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On second thought, `apk search '*'` spits out a bunch of repeats for some reason. Then there's dev and doc packages. There's only 3364 unique packages. On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Michael Fox <415fox@gmail.com> wrote: > Here's all the things I've installed to get tests to pass: > > gnugrep binutils diffutils coreutils linux-headers gzip bash > > And still, of the many basic, core packages I've tested, very few pass all > tests. Maybe less than one in four. > > There's currently 7575 packages in alpine. How much work is that to report > failing tests upstream? Even more work to try and make your own patches. > > Do you think we can get 200 people to take on a package each day for a > month? If so, I volunteer to be one of them. > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Natanael Copa > wrote: > >> On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 16:53:48 -0700 >> Michael Fox <415fox@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Building software on alpine, I notice most problems stem from regex >> > incompatibility. Is there some way achieve compatibility? >> >> yes. use portable regexes and avoid gnu (and other platform) extensions. >> >> > This is especially hard on `make check` because many tests involve >> regexes. >> > To the point that I think a lot of packagers are just not running `make >> > check` because they figure the tests are failing because of test code >> and >> > not the code under test. This may be true most of the time but it is >> > allowing some bugs to slip through. >> >> buts in 'make check' scripts is likely slippering though yes. >> >> I suppose other option is to install gnu sed and gnu grep when doing >> make check. But for longterm, I'd prefer upstream project think more >> about portability. >> >> -nc >> > > > > -- > > - > Michael > -- - Michael --089e01536a588172560519c0251a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On second thought, `apk search '*'` spits out a bu= nch of repeats for some reason. Then there's dev and doc packages. Ther= e's only 3364 unique packages.

=
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Michael Fox <4= 15fox@gmail.com> wrote:
Here's all the things I've installed to get= tests to pass:

gnugrep binutils diffutils coreutils linux-headers g= zip bash

And still, of the many basic, core packages I've = tested, very few pass all tests. Maybe less than one in four.

= There's currently 7575 packages in alpine. How much work is that to rep= ort failing tests upstream? Even more work to try and make your own patches= .

Do you think we can get 200 people to take on a package each day f= or a month? If so, I volunteer to be one of them.

<= div class=3D"gmail_extra">

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Natanael Copa <<= a href=3D"mailto:ncopa@alpinelinux.org" target=3D"_blank">ncopa@alpinelinux= .org> wrote:
On Mon, = 29 Jun 2015 16:53:48 -0700
Michael Fox <415fo= x@gmail.com> wrote:

> Building software on alpine, I notice most problems stem from regex > incompatibility. Is there some way achieve compatibility?

yes. use portable regexes and avoid gnu (and other platform) extensi= ons.

> This is especially hard on `make check` because many tests involve reg= exes.
> To the point that I think a lot of packagers are just not running `mak= e
> check` because they figure the tests are failing because of test code = and
> not the code under test. This may be true most of the time but it is > allowing some bugs to slip through.

buts in 'make check' scripts is likely slippering though yes= .

I suppose other option is to install gnu sed and gnu grep when doing
make check. But for longterm, I'd prefer upstream project think more about portability.

-nc



--

-
Michael



--

-
Michael
--089e01536a588172560519c0251a-- --- Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org Help: alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org ---