[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#69074] [PATCH] Add python-angr.
From: |
Troy Figiel |
Subject: |
[bug#69074] [PATCH] Add python-angr. |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Feb 2024 12:52:41 +0100 |
Hi Sören,
First off, thank you for the patches! I will have a second look myself
today or tomorrow, as I was not familiar with angr and I would love to
try it out / play around with it myself.
On 2024-02-13 10:53, Sören Tempel wrote:
> Sorry about that! I guess because I send 15 emails at once, the MTA
> queued some of them and then just didn't send them in the original order
> (which it isn't required to). I don't think there is much I can do about
> it on my end. I suppose `git-format-patch --numbered` would help?
>
No worries, I'm just mentioning it for other reviewers/committers, as I
don't have commit rights myself.
> The first test is skipped because it needs python-pyvex, the second is
> skipped because it needs python-angr. The first also indirectly depends
> on angr because the VEX converter within ailment needs it. Therefore,
> we cannot enable these tests as they would would result in a cyclic
> dependency (python-angr <-> python-ailment). I can add a comment.
>
Yes, I would cover this with a comment regarding the cyclical
dependency. In general, I prefer failing tests to be "surgically
removed" or clearly commented, since it acts as an entry point for
future developers.
> The test performs benchmark using time.time() and expects a minimum
> timespan to be satisfied [2]. Therefore, it depends on the current load
> and the host CPU. Never failed for me, but probably good to disable it?
>
I've had the same problem with some Go packages. The default test
timeout is set to 10 minutes and due to this, I cannot build these
packages locally. My laptop used to be considered fast :-) It seems QA
passes fine though.
I would be in favour of removing benchmark tests, but a second opinion
would be good.
> P.S: Should I resend the whole patch series with the updates or should
> I only resend the patches that changed due to the outlined updates? Also
> let me know if I should send a revision immediately or if you want me to
> wait for further feedback.
>
I think it would be good to wait for feedback from others and
incorporate everything into a second patch set.
Best wishes,
Troy
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-archinfo., (continued)
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-archinfo., soeren, 2024/02/12
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-pysmt., soeren, 2024/02/12
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: capstone: Backport upstream fix for Python bindings., soeren, 2024/02/12
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: unicorn: Update to 2.0.1.post1., soeren, 2024/02/12
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-angr., soeren, 2024/02/12
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-ailment., soeren, 2024/02/12
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-cle., soeren, 2024/02/12
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-pyvex., soeren, 2024/02/12
- [bug#69074] [PATCH] Add python-angr., Troy Figiel, 2024/02/12
[bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-pysmt., Troy Figiel, 2024/02/15
[bug#69074] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-angr., Troy Figiel, 2024/02/15