On 08/11/2016 02:08 PM, Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 11.08.2016 14:06, Víctor Cuadrado Juan wrote:
On 08/11/2016 11:41 AM, Stephan Kulow wrote:
There is a policy and a rpmlint check for it
Seems the policy is lacking as it is (I point to the mix of symlinks owned and not owned by packages). If you feel like it isn't, please share why you think so and if you think the current state of the symlinks is desirable (that's why I wrote this e-mail :).
No, just some package just don't follow it.
I see that as a sign of a policy that needs to be improved.
- so either you report bugs or fix the packages.
I don't think that starting a mass bug filling for something that hasn't been discussed yet is a solution.
Aehm, so you want to discuss if those packages not following the policy and have a warning in their rpmlint.log are correct? I don't see why.
Exactly, I want to discuss that. Given that I've been only 2 months working in SUSE, and I come from Debian, where normally a violation of a policy means a package not shipped. I suppose I see it more clear now; policies are suggestions in SUSE. I don't intend to change that. But it's a pity that paid users downstream of openSUSE are suffering from seemingly unrelated bugs for months, because of it (that's what brought me to opening this thread).
Honest question, how did you obtain that information? Do we have infrastructure to see failing rpmlint checks by package? (apart from using a script that you need to remember to run?).
You just replace the package name in the above URL. And your mail already mentioned that ctags is buggy.
But that needs a package name beforehand, I want to obtain a list of those packages: to track progress on the filed bugs, and for the maintainers to learn how different maintainers have fixed the same bug they have in their packages. As other distros do. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org