On Sunday 05 March 2006 19:48, Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo) wrote: > Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 23:32 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > so we've found some cases where a package installs objects that > > > either need to be ignored by some of the scanelf checks ... > > > > > > ... > > > > > > what this e-mail is about is naming convention ... i'm thinking > > > that an ebuild sets up a variable with a list of relative paths to > > > $D of files that should be skipped for various checks ... so with > > > slmodem, we'd have like: QA_EXEC_STACK="usr/sbin/slmodemd > > > usr/sbin/slmodem_test" > > > > > > if, in the future, we need to add an ignore list for TEXTRELs, we'd > > > use QA_TEXTRELS="...." > > > > This becomes tricky when looking at tests across all CHOSTs. > > What holds true for one arch defiantly is not the case for others. > > This could be done via the profiles, perhaps - package.qa, something > like package.mask/use/keywords:
i hate such things ... imo this information should stay in the ebuild and nowhere else ... be trivial to expand the support like: QA_TEXTRELS="..." # for all arches QA_TEXTRELS_arch="..." # for just one arch so in the case of slmodem: QA_EXEC_STACK="usr/sbin/slmodemd" in the case of some other package that only has issues on x86: QA_EXEC_STACK_x86="some/foo" this thread was about the naming convention :P does QA_EXEC_STACK and QA_TEXTRELS work for people ? -mike -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
