On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 05:01:46PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hmm, would it be possible to do that inside lintian instead without > > introducing too much complexity? I would prefer not to make harness > > too intelligent, I would bet we would have to implement that intelligence > > again at other places... > > Hm, lintian could fork off a subprocess that handles stderr and adds a tag > to it. But we would have to be careful about out-of-order output and we > may stomp on ourselves and mangle our own output by printing out two > things at the same time.
Yeah, that was the solution I thought off first but considered being too complex ;) Maybe a compromise might be the way to go: Since most of our stderr comes from programs we call, it might be easier to do the tagging for that in lintian itself and only handle stderr from the lintian process (e.g. Perl warnings) in harness. Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www: http://www.djpig.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
