Re: [OE-core][PATCH v4] systemd: re-enable ptest support

["Antonin Godard" <antonin.godard@bootlin.com>]

Hi,

On Wed Sep 9, 2026 at 10:55 AM CEST, Himani Ramesh Barde via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> ptest support for systemd was dropped in 2018 (commit 906230a73b3c)
> when the recipe switched to meson, as there was no easy way to install
> and run the test suite. Current systemd and meson resolve this: the
> meson 'install-tests' option installs the unit-test binaries and a
> run-unit-tests.py runner under ${prefix}/lib/systemd/tests, and
> run-unit-tests.py already emits PASS:/SKIP: results per test.
>
> Add a 'tests' PACKAGECONFIG gated on PTEST_ENABLED that sets -Dtests
> and -Dinstall-tests and pulls in python3-pefile-native (needed to build
> the boot hwids test). do_install_ptest relocates the installed tests
> into ${PTEST_PATH} and drops the mkosi/integration-tests harness (which
> needs a booted system). A run-ptest wrapper drives run-unit-tests.py,
> and systemd is registered in ptest-packagelists.inc.
>
> The test/units integration tests, which require a booted system, are
> out of scope here and can be addressed separately.
>
> Verified on oe-core master (261.2, qemux86-64): with ptest enabled, 342
> unit-test binaries plus run-unit-tests.py install into ${PTEST_PATH} and
> systemd-ptest packages cleanly with no QA errors.
>
> [YOCTO #16386]

I think this is triggering the following error on our test infra:

Parsing recipes...ERROR: /srv/pokybuild/yocto-worker/check-layer/build/layers/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_261.3.bb: QA Issue: Package systemd-ptest is skipping required QA tests. [debug-files]
ERROR: /srv/pokybuild/yocto-worker/check-layer/build/layers/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_261.3.bb: Fatal QA errors were found, failing task.

Full log: https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/valkyrie/api/v2/logs/8951661/raw_inline
Parent build: https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/valkyrie/#/builders/27/builds/4717

This is happening when checking the meta-mingw layer with check-layer though…

Do you mind looking into it?

Thanks,
Antonin