On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 13:43:28 +0700 Tom Hale <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8/10/18 1:35 pm, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote: > > namcap's output is informational, nothing more. Taking it as gospel or > > using it > > as any kind of automated checking instead of actually reading the output is > > not > > sane. > > For greater specificity, the informational output can be split into: > > * Information (-i) > * Warnings > * Errors > > Unless they are badly named, are there any cases in which an error is > not an error? > > And if so, that rule could be excluded with --rules=, again making the > exit code useful. >
Every single error can be a false positive.
