Add RDM tests option to OLA #48575

peternewman · 2016-01-29T02:52:16Z

@brunchboy needs to test this first; this is really just to run Travis against it and start asking some questions regarding some bits.

peternewman · 2016-01-29T02:54:08Z

Sorry, I failed to read the contributing guidelines first, so my commit messages don't have the right prefix.

peternewman · 2016-01-29T02:55:27Z

Library/Formula/ola.rb

@@ -20,14 +21,15 @@ class Ola < Formula

  option :universal
  option "with-ftdi", "Install FTDI USB plugin for OLA."
+  option "with-rdm-tests", "Install RDM Tests for OLA."

  depends_on "pkg-config" => :build
  depends_on "cppunit"


Is there a :test dependency flag? We only need cppunit for the tests.

No, there isn't.

Okay thanks. Any plans to do so? If I understand your bottle concept correctly, will that not still drag the test deps in, despite the fact your unlikely to bother testing the binary?

I'd like to add a TODO if there's an issue covering adding a :test dependency flag.

brunchboy · 2016-01-30T23:02:14Z

Hmm… I am getting stumped as to how to test this as well. Here is the best I have been able to achieve so far, perhaps one of the maintainers can give us some help? I have gotten lost in the documentation.

➜ pn-homebrew git:(master)  brew uninstall ola
Uninstalling /usr/local/Cellar/ola/0.10.0_2... (354 files, 18.1M)
ola 0.10.0, 0.9.3, 0.9.5, 0.9.6, 0.9.7, 0.9.8, 0.9.8_1 are still installed.
Remove them all with `brew uninstall --force ola`.
➜ pn-homebrew git:(master) brew install --with-rdm-tests https://raw.github.com/peternewman/homebrew/master/Library/Formula/ola.rb
######################################################################## 100.0%
==> Downloading https://github.com/OpenLightingProject/ola/releases/download/0.1
Already downloaded: /Library/Caches/Homebrew/ola-0.10.0.tar.gz
==> ./configure --disable-fatal-warnings --disable-silent-rules --prefix=/usr/lo
Last 15 lines from /Users/jim/Library/Logs/Homebrew/ola/01.configure:
checking for MHD_create_response_from_buffer... yes
checking for libftdi... no
checking for libusb... no
checking for libusb_error_name... no
checking for libusb_hotplug_api... no
checking for asm/termios.h... (cached) no
checking for liblo... no
checking for serial port lock directory... checking for a Python interpreter with version >= 2.6... python
checking for python... /usr/bin/python
checking for python version... 2.7
checking for python platform... darwin
checking for python script directory... ${prefix}/lib/python2.7/site-packages
checking for python extension module directory... ${exec_prefix}/lib/python2.7/site-packages
checking for python module: google.protobuf... no
configure: error: failed to find required module google.protobuf

DomT4 · 2016-01-31T00:47:08Z

Library/Formula/ola.rb

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ class Ola < Formula
  homepage "https://www.openlighting.org/ola/"
  url "https://github.com/OpenLightingProject/ola/releases/download/0.10.0/ola-0.10.0.tar.gz"
  sha256 "cae8131a62f0ff78d399c42e64a51b610d7cf090b606704081ec9dd2cf979883"
+  revision 2


Don't need the revision unless we're making a breaking change here. Also would be revision 1; default is 0 and unwritten.

My reading of your docs was a revision was needed to force the build to update, or is that not the case? I simply bumped it each time I committed, as I wasn't sure what it did about freshness, or does it just git pull? Anyway removed.

DomT4 · 2016-01-31T00:49:12Z

Uninstalling /usr/local/Cellar/ola/0.10.0_2... (354 files, 18.1M)
ola 0.10.0, 0.9.3, 0.9.5, 0.9.6, 0.9.7, 0.9.8, 0.9.8_1 are still installed.

I'd maybe consider a brew cleanup ola unless you're intentionally keeping around that many old ola versions 😸.

checking for python module: google.protobuf... no
configure: error: failed to find required module google.protobuf

Did you install protobuf without the Python bindings?

brunchboy · 2016-01-31T00:53:35Z

I should probably clean up many formulas, I don’t think I have ever run brew cleanup on anything, I wasn’t really aware of the need to. 😊

I don’t remember making any specific choices when installing protobuf. It doesn’t look like it though, it seems to report that --universal was my only option selected:

➜ ~ brew info protobuf
protobuf: stable 2.6.1 (bottled), devel 3.0.0-beta-2, HEAD
Protocol buffers (Google's data interchange format)
https://github.com/google/protobuf/
/usr/local/Cellar/protobuf/2.6.1 (81 files, 12.4M) *
  Built from source with: --universal
From: https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew/blob/master/Library/Formula/protobuf.rb
==> Options
--c++11
    Build using C++11 mode
--universal
    Build a universal binary
--with-test
    Run build-time check
--without-python
    Build without python support
--devel
    Install development version 3.0.0-beta-2
--HEAD
    Install HEAD version
==> Caveats
Editor support and examples have been installed to:
  /usr/local/Cellar/protobuf/2.6.1/share/doc/protobuf

peternewman · 2016-01-31T03:10:25Z

My reading of that brew info is it should install with python by default, or have I read that wrong?

Separate question, how do I force --with-python on protobuf when people choose the RDM tests option? Currently it's just depending on protobuf-c, which pulls in protobuf.

peternewman · 2016-01-31T03:13:39Z

I think in the interim @brunchboy you can install protobuf --with-python, then try my Formula again and it will hopefully get further.

brunchboy · 2016-01-31T03:38:02Z

@peternewman you were right, even though I thought my original reading of the brew info was the same as yours, which is that it should install with python by default. Uninstalling protobuf, reinstalling it explicitly --with-python, and then trying your formula --with-rdm-tests was successful, and this time included rdm_model_collector.py, rdm_responder_test.py, and rdm_test_server.py in the bin directory. Hopefully @DomT4 can answer your question about how to make that dependency explicit, but beyond that, things look good. (Also, thanks to him and his brew cleanup suggestion, I have recovered several gigabytes of space on my SSD. 😀 )

brunchboy · 2016-02-05T16:05:02Z

Is there anything else needed from me?

DomT4 · 2016-02-06T00:32:24Z

Ah, I completely missed the email on the notification last week. Not sure why I didn't get nudged by GitHub there. I'll look this over today, and try to look into the protobuf fun as well.

peternewman · 2016-02-06T14:14:37Z

Thanks @DomT4 . @brunchboy we shouldn't need anything from you for the moment, apart from to ideally remove protobuf and ola and retest when it's all working.

Doing this has reminded me we don't have a Ja Rule option yet, now that's launched, so we should try and do that at some point too.

brunchboy · 2016-02-06T22:32:23Z

All right, sounds good. Having overcome my superstitious fears of uninstalling and reinstalling ola and protobuf once (because they’re so critical to the project devouring my free time 😉) it will be no problem to do it again when it’s all ready.

DomT4 · 2016-02-13T04:22:27Z

Sorry, I haven't forgotten this. Life and Homebrew are both combining to be extremely hectic, which is fun. If I don't post some kind of update here today please feel free to throw 🍅s at me.

DomT4 · 2016-02-13T21:40:20Z

Well, my hunch was wrong. I thought perhaps passing --universal interfered in some way with generating Python bindings for Protobuf but I can't reproduce that. I'm tempted to say @brunchboy's issue was some local build problem rather than indicative of a wider problem unless others start reporting it as well.

how do I force --with-python on protobuf when people choose the RDM tests option?

At the moment, you can't. You can make people build with non-default options, but you can't make people build with default options. Really though, the amount of Homebrew users who deviate from the defaults is a minority of the user base and I can't foresee significant issues here. Hopefully not famous last words there 😉.

Need one small change in the formula but otherwise I'm happy:

if build.with? "rdm-tests"
  depends_on :python if MacOS.version <= :snow_leopard
else
  depends_on :python => :optional
end

peternewman · 2016-03-01T23:28:38Z

Sorry @DomT4 I've been rather sidetracked too. A similar question to the other, is there an issue for adding the feature to force a --with, so I can add a comment and we can improve our fomula when it gets fixed?

Can we at least detect which --with option they've chosen and display a warning to the user, or can we only put a comment in the formula?

DomT4 · 2016-03-02T23:04:47Z

You can check the options if you wish to, example. It's pretty rare, we tend to reserve it for cases that are known to be a regular occurrence.

brunchboy · 2016-03-25T15:15:56Z

@peternewman I am still waiting for this PR to be closed before updating the formula to include OLA 0.10.1, so Homebrew is still stuck on 0.10.0. I am sure you are busy preparing for the Google Summer of Code, but is there any hope we can see this finished soon?

DomT4 · 2016-03-25T16:21:50Z

@BrewTestBot test this please

DomT4 · 2016-03-25T23:45:36Z

Merged in 52b37f1. Thank you for your contribution to Homebrew @peternewman; we appreciate it! 😺

peternewman · 2016-03-26T02:31:41Z

Library/Formula/ola.rb

  depends_on "ossp-uuid"
+  depends_on "libusb" => :recommended
+  depends_on "liblo" => :recommended
  depends_on :python => :optional


Is this line redundant, now its been duplicated on line 44?

I chopped it in post before merging.

Ah yes, just spotted that. Thanks.

peternewman · 2016-03-26T02:32:28Z

Sorry @brunchboy . Okay based on your comments @DomT4 I won't bother actively checking and we can see how people get on with it.

Closes Homebrew/legacy-homebrew#48575. Signed-off-by: Dominyk Tiller <dominyktiller@gmail.com>

brunchboy · 2016-03-27T03:20:19Z

Great, thanks, guys! I have submitted a PR to update the formula to 0.10.1.

peternewman added 2 commits January 29, 2016 02:33

Make libusb and liblo optional

321e1ff

Add an rdm-tests option

ed1b7b7

peternewman reviewed Jan 29, 2016
View reviewed changes

DomT4 reviewed Jan 31, 2016
View reviewed changes

ola: fix PR comments

fa7a04f

OLA: Fix the remaining comment

0256134

DomT4 closed this in 52b37f1 Mar 25, 2016

peternewman reviewed Mar 26, 2016
View reviewed changes

xu-cheng pushed a commit to Homebrew/homebrew-core that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2016

ola: add rdm-tests option

7844cd8

Closes Homebrew/legacy-homebrew#48575. Signed-off-by: Dominyk Tiller <dominyktiller@gmail.com>

Homebrew locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 10, 2016

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add RDM tests option to OLA #48575

Add RDM tests option to OLA #48575

peternewman commented Jan 29, 2016

peternewman commented Jan 29, 2016

peternewman Jan 29, 2016

DomT4 Jan 31, 2016

peternewman Jan 31, 2016

peternewman Mar 1, 2016

brunchboy commented Jan 30, 2016

DomT4 Jan 31, 2016

peternewman Jan 31, 2016

DomT4 commented Jan 31, 2016

brunchboy commented Jan 31, 2016

peternewman commented Jan 31, 2016

peternewman commented Jan 31, 2016

brunchboy commented Jan 31, 2016

brunchboy commented Feb 5, 2016

DomT4 commented Feb 6, 2016

peternewman commented Feb 6, 2016

brunchboy commented Feb 6, 2016

DomT4 commented Feb 13, 2016

DomT4 commented Feb 13, 2016

peternewman commented Mar 1, 2016

DomT4 commented Mar 2, 2016

brunchboy commented Mar 25, 2016

DomT4 commented Mar 25, 2016

DomT4 commented Mar 25, 2016

peternewman Mar 26, 2016

DomT4 Mar 26, 2016

peternewman Mar 26, 2016

peternewman commented Mar 26, 2016

brunchboy commented Mar 27, 2016

Add RDM tests option to OLA #48575

Add RDM tests option to OLA #48575

Conversation

peternewman commented Jan 29, 2016

peternewman commented Jan 29, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

brunchboy commented Jan 30, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

DomT4 commented Jan 31, 2016

brunchboy commented Jan 31, 2016

peternewman commented Jan 31, 2016

peternewman commented Jan 31, 2016

brunchboy commented Jan 31, 2016

brunchboy commented Feb 5, 2016

DomT4 commented Feb 6, 2016

peternewman commented Feb 6, 2016

brunchboy commented Feb 6, 2016

DomT4 commented Feb 13, 2016

DomT4 commented Feb 13, 2016

peternewman commented Mar 1, 2016

DomT4 commented Mar 2, 2016

brunchboy commented Mar 25, 2016

DomT4 commented Mar 25, 2016

DomT4 commented Mar 25, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

peternewman commented Mar 26, 2016

brunchboy commented Mar 27, 2016