| 1 |
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 4:56 AM Jason Zaman <perfinion@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Replying to a somewhat random post. There are two separate things here |
| 4 |
> that people are discussing here but are not the same thing. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Three, really... |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> 1) We want to know when a package has terrible warnings when installing |
| 10 |
> it so we can report upstream and know that something might have gone |
| 11 |
> wrong. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
There is also the case where we want these warnings to block |
| 14 |
installation, because the risk of there being a problem is too great. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Stick this in your make.conf: |
| 18 |
> PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM="echo save" |
| 19 |
> PORTAGE_ELOG_CLASSES="warn error log qa" |
| 20 |
> I'm pretty sure toralf's tinderbox already has these enabled but all |
| 21 |
> devs should too. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
The problem is that this will make the warnings non-fatal. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Do we still tell users not to report these kinds of warnings in |
| 26 |
bugzilla? If they're the sort we consider serious then we would want |
| 27 |
to know about it so that we can address it, vs just waiting for |
| 28 |
upstream to fix them in a future release. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
There might be a better solution than -Werror, such as a flag in an |
| 31 |
ebuild that makes the existing QA warning fatal and tells the user to |
| 32 |
log a bug. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Rich |
Archives