1 |
Mark Loeser <halcy0n@g.o> said: |
2 |
> Thilo Bangert <bangert@g.o> said: |
3 |
> > trying to install openssh on the dev profile one is greated with this |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > bugger: |
6 |
> > * QA Notice: Package has poor programming practices which may |
7 |
> > compile * fine but exhibit random runtime failures. |
8 |
> > * closefromtest.c:46: warning: implicit declaration of function |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > ‘closefrom’ |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > * Please do not file a Gentoo bug and instead report the above QA |
13 |
> > * issues directly to the upstream developers of this software. |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > This looks really really weird. On the one hand we are saying: "Its a |
16 |
> > QA issue but upstream should fix it." followed by "It so broke, we |
17 |
> > wont let you install it." |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Personally I think we should be directing our users to our Bugzilla |
20 |
> always. We really don't want to be pissing off upstreams if we put in |
21 |
> a patch that triggers one of these QA warnings and it ends up being |
22 |
> our problem and not theirs. |
23 |
|
24 |
i would agree, that all issues should be reported in our own bugzilla |
25 |
(also). |
26 |
|
27 |
It would be really nice if we somehow could annotate the bug, in the |
28 |
ebuild, so that the warning already includes the bug number (or is |
29 |
silenced by it) in an effort to reduce the number of duplicates. |
30 |
|
31 |
where are these qa checks implemented anyway? |
32 |
|
33 |
thanks |
34 |
Thilo |