On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 20:24 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 02:22:16PM -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > > > > If you look closely, rpmlint output is separated into warnings (W:) and > > errors (E:). Just like a C compiler. > > If I remember well Ville said that the difference between W and E was > quite arbitrary. And we can always make them less arbitrary. Its not set in stone. rpmlint is *our* tool. > > Errors MUST be fixed to pass review. (Or to pass the upcoming > > rpmlint-after-build test) > > Some errors have to be ignored (from the top of my head, errors about > setuid binaries, for example). You didn't quote the part where I said: > > And if rpmlint flags something as an error that shouldn't be, file a > > bug against rpmlint. The test can be revised, or downgraded to a > > warning. If there's any justification at all to ignore an error, ever, then it should be downgraded to a warning.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
