RPATH status

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 22:28 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Hans de Goede (j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl) said: 
> > rpmlint catches this, I'm sitll in favor of running rpmlint after a build, 
> > check the output against a whitelist of allowed output and if there is any 
> > output not in the whitelist, fail the build. We would need to integrate the 
> > same use of rpmlint in make <arch> from makefile.common then (or maybe 
> > first).
> 
> Do we really want to hold up builds on the rpmlint maintainer fixing
> things in rpmlint?
> 
If this is the same thought as past discussions, the whitelist is per
package.  I make a build.  The rpms are run through rpmlint.  The issues
reported are compared against the previous build's rpmlint.  If there
are problems not previously whitelisted, the rpm is not pushed to the
repo until the maintainer somehow adds the warnings to the whitelist or
updates the spec so it no longer causes the error. (Maybe it's filling
in a reason and submitting it to the packageDB.  Maybe it's a specially
formatted comment in the spec file.  I don't know how people would want
to implement the feature.)

So there's no waiting on the rpmlint maintainer.  This could also be
interesting as it would let the rpmlint maintainer/author see which of
the rpmlint tests are causing the most false positives.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070309/8e043946/attachment.sig>