Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (129 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-packaging] RPMLINT > rpmlintrc
- From: Ludwig Nussel <ludwig.nussel@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:00:39 +0100
- Message-id: <200901121500.39443.ludwig.nussel@xxxxxxx>
Michal Vyskocil wrote:
Yet such information is valuable to know about a package. If a
binary package doesn't fulfil our standards why lie about it?
Of course flooding the log with stuff you can't fix anways isn't
optimal either. Maybe a summary of ignored errors would satisfy both
needs.
cu
Ludwig
--
(o_ Ludwig Nussel
//\
V_/_ http://www.suse.de/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
On Friday 09 January 2009 13:57:17 Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Philipp Thomas wrote:
BTW, warnings like those that message
catalogs aren't marked %lang should not be suppressed but rather fixed in
the sources.
Actually no warnings should be suppressed at all IMO.
There is a big exception from that rule - in case we distribute a program
without access to its source code (for example Sun/IBM Java). These packages
contains some issues in binaries like executable stack, or something else
which is unfixable for packager. So suppressing of this messages is useful
because it's easier found a packaging bugs in shorter rpmlint output.
Yet such information is valuable to know about a package. If a
binary package doesn't fulfil our standards why lie about it?
Of course flooding the log with stuff you can't fix anways isn't
optimal either. Maybe a summary of ignored errors would satisfy both
needs.
cu
Ludwig
--
(o_ Ludwig Nussel
//\
V_/_ http://www.suse.de/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |