On (23/02/16 14:23), Rob Crittenden wrote:
>Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (23/02/16 17:09), Martin Basti wrote:
>>> We cannot guarantee that versions older than 1.4 will work with freeipa
>>> Patch attached.
>>>From a59e72a0b87231c0f2e0d737057550dd532feed7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Martin Basti <mba...@redhat.com>
>>> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 16:58:07 +0100
>>> Subject: [PATCH] Set BuildRequires to pylint >= 1.4
>>> We can guarantee that only pylint 1.4 and newer will work
>>> freeipa.spec.in | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> diff --git a/freeipa.spec.in b/freeipa.spec.in
>>> --- a/freeipa.spec.in
>>> +++ b/freeipa.spec.in
>>> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ BuildRequires: python-netaddr
>>> BuildRequires: python-gssapi >= 1.1.2
>>> BuildRequires: python-rhsm
>>> BuildRequires: pyOpenSSL
>>> -BuildRequires: pylint >= 1.0
>>> +BuildRequires: pylint >= 1.4
>> I can build rpms even withour pylint and pylint is not executed
>> anywhere in spec file. (in other words, my patch was rejected)
>> Why does it need to be in BuildRequires?
>pylint is part of the in-tree build process (make rpms). It is not
>executed when building upstream packages.
It's not buildrequires becuase I can rebuild src.rpm
without it. It should not be there or it should be optional
to do not break developer workflow.
e.g. "%bcond_with extra_dependencies_for_pylint"
The upstream spec files is close to the fedora spec file
and pylint is istalled there even though it's not used.
Another use case is coverity scan.
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code