On Thu 30 Sep 2010 12:38 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 30/09/10 12:26, Loui Chang wrote: > >On Thu 30 Sep 2010 12:10 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > >>On 30/09/10 11:56, Loui Chang wrote: > >>>On Wed 29 Sep 2010 21:59 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > >>>>The checking of the package for $srcdir references was overly > >>>>sensitive and gave a lot of what appear to be false positives with > >>>>binary files (in particular with debugging symbols kept). > >>>> > >>>>Restrict the search for $srcdir to non-binary files as this should > >>>>still catch the majority of configuration issues the check was > >>>>initially designed to catch. Also, add a similar check for $pkgdir. > >>> > >>>Just curious. Shouldn't these checks really be part of namcap rather > >>>than makepkg? > >> > >>How would namcap know where a package was built? > > > >I haven't thought of the implementation. How would you implement it? > > > >I wondered since namcap is the package checking tool that it should have > >such functionality rather than makepkg itself. > > > >Perhaps makepkg could hand things off to namcap if the packager wishes > >to check the package for any issues. > > There are reasons not to have makepkg pass stuff directly to namcap. > Primarily, I do not have (or want) python in my clean chroots so > namcap would not run there. The only other way would be to put a > reference to the build root somewhere in the .PKGINFO file so that > namcap could read it in and check for it but I do not like the idea > of putting that sort of stuff there.
I wasn't implying that package checking should be forced. Well, package checking via namcap should remain optional. Maybe checking for $srcdir references could also be optional. I don't know if putting a reference to the build root would be a good idea. I think it could be something passed directly to namcap immediately after building. > Overall, I agree that makepkg should not do much package checking, > but this is something best suited to being in makepkg. I would > definitely not like the checks performed by makepkg to unnecessarily > expand beyond anything that can be done in 1 or 2 lines of bash... Yep. I'm just brainstorming different possibilities. I'm glad to have feedback about it. Cheers.
