digitalmars.D - Testing with nearly all packages in code.dlang.org
- Atila Neves (14/14) Sep 19 2023 In the spirit of avoiding any further breakage, I wrote a little
- Adam D Ruppe (4/7) Sep 19 2023 It is vital to try the various subpackages to get decent
- Atila Neves (8/16) Sep 19 2023 That's usually the case though, no?
- Andrea Fontana (5/19) Sep 29 2023 What if some of them contain malicious code in the pre-build
- Imperatorn (3/10) Sep 29 2023 Real men run unknown code 🦸
- Per =?UTF-8?B?Tm9yZGzDtnc=?= (3/4) Oct 06 2023 And smart men only run unknown code that is proven to not have
- Jonathan M Davis (6/27) Oct 01 2023 If there are concerns about that sort of thing, then it's easy enough to...
In the spirit of avoiding any further breakage, I wrote a little D script to get a list of all dub packages that still build since projects get stale. It took ~44min on my laptop using 20 threads to try and build all 2381 (as of yesterday) dub packages. This included downloading all of them, I did an `rm -rf ~/.dub/packages` just before. 1362 of them returned 0 for `dub build`, or about 57%. It's probably a good idea to actually do `dub build --build=unittest` since that'll include more D code. I don't know if some of them fail because they need custom build/CI; I think it's safe to ignore them even if that's the case, since a dub package needs to just build with dub. The list and the code is at https://github.com/atilaneves/all-dub-packages.
Sep 19 2023
On Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 21:37:32 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:1362 of them returned 0 for `dub build`, or about 57%. It's probably a good idea to actually do `dub build --build=unittest` since that'll include more D code.It is vital to try the various subpackages to get decent coverage; dub build ignores them unless they are declared as explicit dependencies on the top level thing.
Sep 19 2023
Atila Neves <atila.neves gmail.com> On Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 21:44:11 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:On Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 21:37:32 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:That's usually the case though, no? Other than manually crawling through the filesystem after downloading the package for dub.sdl/dub.json files I don't know how to do this generally. And even then that might not work because they might not be meant to be used that way. This is a lot more coverage than before though, but of course I'm open to suggestions on how to avoid breakage even further.1362 of them returned 0 for `dub build`, or about 57%. It's probably a good idea to actually do `dub build --build=unittest` since that'll include more D code.It is vital to try the various subpackages to get decent coverage; dub build ignores them unless they are declared as explicit dependencies on the top level thing.
Sep 19 2023
On Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 21:37:32 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:In the spirit of avoiding any further breakage, I wrote a little D script to get a list of all dub packages that still build since projects get stale. It took ~44min on my laptop using 20 threads to try and build all 2381 (as of yesterday) dub packages. This included downloading all of them, I did an `rm -rf ~/.dub/packages` just before. 1362 of them returned 0 for `dub build`, or about 57%. It's probably a good idea to actually do `dub build --build=unittest` since that'll include more D code. I don't know if some of them fail because they need custom build/CI; I think it's safe to ignore them even if that's the case, since a dub package needs to just build with dub. The list and the code is at https://github.com/atilaneves/all-dub-packages.What if some of them contain malicious code in the pre-build phase or in unit tests? I wouldn't run that massive indiscriminate build :) Andrea
Sep 29 2023
On Friday, 29 September 2023 at 08:00:15 UTC, Andrea Fontana wrote:On Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 21:37:32 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:Real men run unknown code 🦸[...]What if some of them contain malicious code in the pre-build phase or in unit tests? I wouldn't run that massive indiscriminate build :) Andrea
Sep 29 2023
On Friday, 29 September 2023 at 08:30:22 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:Real men run unknown code 🦸And smart men only run unknown code that is proven to not have any side effects. ;)
Oct 06 2023
On Friday, September 29, 2023 2:00:15 AM MDT Andrea Fontana via Digitalmars-d wrote:On Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 21:37:32 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:If there are concerns about that sort of thing, then it's easy enough to do it all in an appropriately restricted environment where malicious stuff won't matter, because it won't impact anything outside of that environment. - Jonathan M DavisIn the spirit of avoiding any further breakage, I wrote a little D script to get a list of all dub packages that still build since projects get stale. It took ~44min on my laptop using 20 threads to try and build all 2381 (as of yesterday) dub packages. This included downloading all of them, I did an `rm -rf ~/.dub/packages` just before. 1362 of them returned 0 for `dub build`, or about 57%. It's probably a good idea to actually do `dub build --build=unittest` since that'll include more D code. I don't know if some of them fail because they need custom build/CI; I think it's safe to ignore them even if that's the case, since a dub package needs to just build with dub. The list and the code is at https://github.com/atilaneves/all-dub-packages.What if some of them contain malicious code in the pre-build phase or in unit tests? I wouldn't run that massive indiscriminate build :)
Oct 01 2023