From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8739565CD0 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 09:50:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.9/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t2J9ofxV029702 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 19 Mar 2015 02:50:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.174] (128.224.162.174) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.224.2; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 02:50:40 -0700 Message-ID: <550A9BEF.7070802@windriver.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:50:39 +0800 From: Robert Yang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Eggleton References: <2d7e85e6c09f99cac9e6f7c7bd9e33411dc7ac63.1426756518.git.liezhi.yang@windriver.com> <1854796.UtEVgRut4l@peggleto-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1854796.UtEVgRut4l@peggleto-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] insane.bbclass: add missing QA to WARN_QA 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: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 09:50:41 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Paul, Thanks for the reply, I just wanted to add them to ALL_QA, but you are right, I need do more checking and fix, please ignore this patch atm. // Robert On 03/19/2015 05:37 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > Hi Robert, > > On Thursday 19 March 2015 02:17:43 Robert Yang wrote: >> The following QA were not in WARN_QA or ERROR_QA, so they are not in >> ALL_QA: >> >> buildpaths > > Last I checked enabling this throws up quite a few issues, some of which > aren't a problem. Has that been fixed? If not, we can't enable it. > >> desktop > > I'm pretty sure we kept this one off deliberately as well, there are too many > bad desktop files out there and for most people it doesn't matter. > >> libexec > > Does this test work? > >> pkgname > > Only certain package managers care about the rules this test enforces. > >> symlink-to-sysroot > > I agree this one should probably be enabled. > >> unsafe-references-in-binaries >> unsafe-references-in-scripts > > We haven't enabled these because there isn't general agreement that this is a > problem for everyone. > > Cheers, > Paul >