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

[Marius Mauch]

On Sun, 5 Mar 2006 20:46:25 -0500
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote:

> 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 ?

Personally I'd call it QA_IGNORE_*, but that's just me.

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.
-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list