From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.windriver.com (mail1.windriver.com [147.11.146.13]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59937021B for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 08:02:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail1.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s6B82GVf027549 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 11 Jul 2014 01:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.204] (128.224.162.204) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.169.1; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 01:02:16 -0700 Message-ID: <53BF9A05.1020100@windriver.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 16:02:13 +0800 From: Chong Lu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Eggleton References: <53BF3CF3.609@windriver.com> <5076045.c5iu4589rZ@peggleto-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <5076045.c5iu4589rZ@peggleto-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com> X-Originating-IP: [128.224.162.204] Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] classes/insane: Show QA check name X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 08:02:20 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 07/11/2014 01:45 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > Hi Chong, > > On Friday 11 July 2014 09:25:07 Chong Lu wrote: >> On 07/09/2014 09:39 AM, Chong Lu wrote: >>> QA errors/warnings would show the name of the QA failure in the >>> error/warning message.> >>> The format is listed: >>> [The name of QA] QA Issue: messages >>> >>> You can see which QA check you need to disable if you want to disable it. > The way I had envisaged this being shown was [QA check name]; since > the message is the important part (in general we really want to encourage > people to fix the QA issues rather than disabling them). This also matches up > with gcc's warning message behaviour. > > Cheers, > Paul > Hi Paul, Thanks your reply. I will change format of message and resend a V2. Best Regards Chong