Re: Running rpmlint within mock

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Christian Iseli and I were discussing the possibility of automatically > running rpmlint somehow. Hey, thanks for posting this... I was just about to post such a message myself :-) I've tried to give some thought and get some feedback from the f-e-l li

Re: Running rpmlint within mock

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Why do we need to install the just-generated binary RPMs in the chroot? AFAIU, rpmlint can catch more/other things when a package is installed. So the full thing seems to be: 1 rpmlint the src.rpm 2 rpmlint the .rpm 3 install the rpm and then run rpmlint again Since

Re: Running rpmlint within mock

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Installing the freshly built package is a big no. May I ask why ? Christian -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list

Re: Running rpmlint within mock

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Getting the rpmlint output is easy enough. Doing anything more than that > sounds like something out of the scope of mock. Agreed. > Ah, we're talking automated test suite here. Yup. > That's not mock. Ok. > I applaud your desire to automate this stuff, but I don't

Re: Running rpmlint within mock

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Sounds like a good idea to me... I suggested some other things to check on > this list a few months back. Yes. I hope I put them all on the wiki here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/QA Christian -- Fedora-buildsys-

Re: Running rpmlint within mock

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > The whole discussion is about doing something extra with mock itself, and has > nothing to do with plague or with the actual Extras buildsys. It was probably me who gave that impression. Sorry about that. I would actually like the buildsys to run rpmlint on built packa

Re: Running rpmlint within mock

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Installing the package outside of the chroot is completely senseless. I completely agree, but I was thinking about installing the package *within* the chroot, not on the build host's root... Is that also a big no ? Christian

slides

Hi folks, Anyone has slides he would be willing to share that describe plague and mock ? I'd like to give a short presentation to co-workers here... Thanks, Christian -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.

Re: Mock going forward

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:56:40 -0500, Clark Williams wrote: > Thinking about this a bit more makes me wonder if we need to be > able to install rpm's *using* yum, since yum brings with it the ability > to resolve dependencies. Yes, I think we'll need yum. > I say this because the RPM we just genera

Re: mock issues on ia64 with LoadLibrary("libc.so.6")

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:49:47 -0500, Doug Chapman wrote: > Does anybody have ideas on how we can make this more portable? The path to libc.so.6* is in libc.so: $ cat /usr/lib/libc.so /* GNU ld script Use the shared library, but some functions are only in the static library, so try that second

Re: fun with CVS branching

On 21 Apr 2008 21:35:01 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > "BN" == Bill Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > BN> So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep > BN> supporting this? > > I can't see how it's all that useful. And given that this is the kind >