Re: rpmlint FAILED for cppad-20160000.0-2.fc24

[Kamil Paral]

> > "KP" == Kamil Paral  writes:
> 
> KP> Hello, we have an RFE for adding a rpmlint whitelist feature here:
> KP> https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T692
> 
> I can't actually log into phabricator to respond there, 

Just log in with your fasusern...@fedoraproject.org email. If you receive an 
error the first time, please try again, there's a bug somewhere :)

> but really this
> needs to be with the spec file.
> 
> I edit spec files in vim, with syntastic calling rpmlint to check syntax
> on the fly.  Having a per-package rpmlintrc is the only reasonable way
> to handle this kind of thing; taskotron just needs to know how to get to
> it.  I really wish more packagers did this, because sometimes rpmlint
> has so many complaints about a package that you have to wonder if
> anyone's actually run it against the package I'm viewing.  

I added your feedback to the ticket.

> Having
> taskotron do some spamming is a great start.

That was actually a mistake, we want to inform people by default only about 
"release critical" checks, which rpmlint is not. But improvements on this are 
planned for the future.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: rpmlint FAILED for cppad-20160000.0-2.fc24

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

> "KP" == Kamil Paral  writes:

KP> Just log in with your fasusern...@fedoraproject.org email. If you
KP> receive an error the first time, please try again, there's a bug
KP> somewhere :)

Yeah, know that much, but after getting through persona and the Fedora
signin, I just got kicked back to a page telling me that there had been
a HTTP 500 error.

For some reason I'm still in the office at 4:22AM so trying again will
have to wait until some time in the future.

 - J<
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: rpmlint FAILED for cppad-20160000.0-2.fc24

[Kamil Paral]

> I have comments at the top of the spec file that explain the reason for
> the warning below. In addition, I have posted messages about this
> warning on this list; see
> project.org/thread/GI3L74J47OLRTYLQIMSEUA7SUZR5VLU7/#JUUSDFET2HBPUDIP3G7CPHB7Q7XCCLEG
> 
> Should I just ignore the message below ?
> 
> On 2/3/2016 8:15 PM, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> > rpmlint FAILED for cppad-2016.0-2.fc24
> > 
> > https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/38d832c0-cac2-11e5-8d1c-525400120b80/task_output/cppad-2016.0-2.fc24.log

Hello, we have an RFE for adding a rpmlint whitelist feature here:
https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T692

For the moment, please ignore those warnings/errors that you know that do not 
apply to your case. Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: rpmlint FAILED for cppad-20160000.0-2.fc24

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

> "KP" == Kamil Paral  writes:

KP> Hello, we have an RFE for adding a rpmlint whitelist feature here:
KP> https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T692

I can't actually log into phabricator to respond there, but really this
needs to be with the spec file.

I edit spec files in vim, with syntastic calling rpmlint to check syntax
on the fly.  Having a per-package rpmlintrc is the only reasonable way
to handle this kind of thing; taskotron just needs to know how to get to
it.  I really wish more packagers did this, because sometimes rpmlint
has so many complaints about a package that you have to wonder if
anyone's actually run it against the package I'm viewing.  Having
taskotron do some spamming is a great start.

 - J<
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: rpmlint FAILED for cppad-20160000.0-2.fc24

[Brad Bell]

My previous message about this problem had a spam link in it (my 
mistake, I did not check the html address carefully and got caught by a 
spam generator). Perhaps someone has permission to remove the link in 
the previous message (see SPAM LINK HERE in copy of previous message below).


A better link for the previous discussion about this is:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-January/148045.html

Here are the comments from the top of the spec file that explain why it 
is using rpm-buildroot.


# cppad.spec: rpm-buildroot-usage
# The %%prep section of this spec file contains a reference to %%buildroot.
# This is used to read (not write) information in %%buildroot%%includdir
# (using g++ -I %%buildroot%%includedir ). Thus it is not a violation of
# http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#
#  Scriplets_are_only_allowed_to_write_in_certain_directories
#

I am reading buildroot so that I can test the installed version of the include 
files
(better testing that using the ones in the build directory).

Perhaps rpm-lint can be fixed so it does not generate a warning in this 
case ?



On 2/4/2016 6:22 AM, Brad Bell wrote:
I have comments at the top of the spec file that explain the reason 
for the warning below. In addition, I have posted messages about this 
warning on this list; see

'SPAM LINK HERE'

Should I just ignore the message below ?

On 2/3/2016 8:15 PM, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote:

rpmlint FAILED for cppad-2016.0-2.fc24
https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/38d832c0-cac2-11e5-8d1c-525400120b80/task_output/cppad-2016.0-2.fc24.log 



--
You received this message due to your preference settings at
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/notifications/bradbell.id.fedoraproject.org/email/25426 




--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: rpmlint FAILED for cppad-20160000.0-2.fc24

[Brad Bell]

I have comments at the top of the spec file that explain the reason for 
the warning below. In addition, I have posted messages about this 
warning on this list; see

project.org/thread/GI3L74J47OLRTYLQIMSEUA7SUZR5VLU7/#JUUSDFET2HBPUDIP3G7CPHB7Q7XCCLEG

Should I just ignore the message below ?

On 2/3/2016 8:15 PM, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote:

rpmlint FAILED for cppad-2016.0-2.fc24

https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/38d832c0-cac2-11e5-8d1c-525400120b80/task_output/cppad-2016.0-2.fc24.log

--
You received this message due to your preference settings at
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/notifications/bradbell.id.fedoraproject.org/email/25426

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org