-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 29-07-10 10:50, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > Dear all, > > Given the discussions on quality that sometimes pop up (and also triggered > by Robert's message), I decided to kick off a bitbake -k world.
Could you first explain to me why 'bitbake world' is a good way to measure quality? I would think that building something like console-image and looking at the following would be a much better metric: * does it build? * are all the rootfs types working? * does the image do what it is supposed to do? * Are all the licenses of the output packages correct? * Do the output packages have any spurious deps? * Is the content of the output packages correct? * Are there any known CVEs in the resulting packages? * Did packaged-staging do its job? * What kind of QA errors and warnings were raised? * Did all recipes pass recipe_sanity? * Did all recipes conform to oe-stylize.py? etc I would actually advocate removing the 'world' feature from bitbake/OE to stop people from wasting time on looking at bitbake world and have them fix actual problems. regards, Koen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMUU3HMkyGM64RGpERAgioAJ90DxRRG5meARUBbMcQ25jadn4k4QCeKkEd r4DWO6n6DTFhAucGqx78Yxc= =Dv4L -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
