On 30/01/16 09:54 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:I've seen a few spec files with content like this: %configure --disable-static --with-imagemagick --with-magickpp \ --without-libavcodec CPPFLAGS='-DMagickLib=MagickCore -I/usr/include/ImageMagick' There's no backslash before the CPPFLAGS variable, so it's useless. Should rpmlimt warn about this? It would have to allow indentation after %if or shell if/for/while etc. so might be tricky to do for the whole spec file, but just doing it for %configure would have been enough for the cases I've seen recently. Worth creating a BZ enhancement request for rpmlint?BZ, no. Upstream github, perhaps, if submitted as a pull request containing the implementation and a bunch of test cases.
Insisting that feature requests provide an implementation is a good way to ensure nobody bothers asking for improvements to a tool.
Note however that in your example above, although very likely, it is possible that CPPFLAGS might not actually be useless, it depends what comes after it.
Yes, but in that case it should not be indented.
Quite honestly, I think getting this robust enough will be quite a bit of work for a small number of cases, and possibly minor effect even within them.
OK, I'll just report bugs against the individual packages and ask the maintainers to fix their indentation to avoid confusion. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
