Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [rfc] variable naming for marking binaries as QA ignorable

[Mike Frysinger]

On Sunday 05 March 2006 19:48, Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo) wrote:
> Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> 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@g.o mailing list