Hey Niels!
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:42:00AM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
>
>When you write that it is a lot of effort to debug the lintian tests,
>then I wonder if it is because our documentation is lacking. Like:
>
> * We can run the test in isolation (i.e. you don't have to run all the
>
tags 895574 + pending
thanks
> […]
Awesome, thanks Steve! Applied in Git, pending upload:
https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/commit/2fd37bce3554298dcaa1605c02da49be4c77090a
checks/binaries.pm | 3 ++-
debian/changelog | 4
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Steve McIntyre:
> [...] Wow, debugging lintian tests is a lot of effort!
>
Hi Steve,
Thanks for your work on lintian. :)
When you write that it is a lot of effort to debug the lintian tests,
then I wonder if it is because our documentation is lacking. Like:
* We can run the test in
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 07:09:38PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
>
>>>I suspect the underlying problem is that we are not detecting
>>>profiling information on armhf correctly. The relevant code is:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/blob/master/checks/binaries.pm#L192-207
>>>
>>>I
Chris Lamb wrote:
> > I can have a look. So we're looking at the same thing, what's
> > in "basic.c"?
>
> Ooh, thanks! So this is basic.c:
You haven't had a moment to look at this yet, have you? :-)
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org /
[Replying to st...@eilval.com!]
Hey Sledge,
>>I suspect the underlying problem is that we are not detecting
>>profiling information on armhf correctly. The relevant code is:
>>
>>
>> https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/blob/master/checks/binaries.pm#L192-207
>>
>>I have attached the
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 06:19:51PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:36:59PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
>>tags 895574 + moreinfo
>>thanks
>>
>>Hi Jeremy,
>>
>>Thanks for the report!
>>
>>> armhf is a bit different than the other Ubuntu architectures because
>>> it uses a
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:36:59PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
>tags 895574 + moreinfo
>thanks
>
>Hi Jeremy,
>
>Thanks for the report!
>
>> armhf is a bit different than the other Ubuntu architectures because
>> it uses a different kind of virtualization
>
>I suspect the underlying problem is that we
tags 895574 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi Jeremy,
Thanks for the report!
> armhf is a bit different than the other Ubuntu architectures because
> it uses a different kind of virtualization
I suspect the underlying problem is that we are not detecting
profiling information on armhf correctly. The
Source: lintian
Version: 2.5.81
Ubuntu runs its autopkgtests for all of its supported architectures.
One of lintian's tests (binary-compiled-with-profiling-enabled) fails
when the autopkgtest is run on armhf.
armhf is a bit different than the other Ubuntu architectures because
it uses a
10 matches
Mail list logo
