On Mon, 2023-12-18 at 12:42 -0800, simone.p.we...@posteo.com wrote:
> > I agree, this would be a good change to make for long-term
> > maintainability. LGTM otherwise.
> I have tried to implement such a check as well, and while this check
> is fine
> and works, the test of a patch with patchtest
>
> I agree, this would be a good change to make for long-term
> maintainability. LGTM otherwise.
I have tried to implement such a check as well, and while this check is fine
and works, the test of a patch with patchtest containing a variable from
BB_RENAMED_VARIABLES that is not a pretest,
On 2023-12-13 06:27, Ross Burton wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023, at 16:45, simone.p.weiss via lists.openembedded.org
wrote:
From: Simone Weiß
If a recipes was modified recommand the use of `CVE_STATUS` instead if
`CVE_CHECK_IGNORE` is used. This is a depreacted variable and will
result in a warning
On 11 Dec 2023, at 16:45, simone.p.weiss via lists.openembedded.org
wrote:
>
> From: Simone Weiß
>
> If a recipes was modified recommand the use of `CVE_STATUS` instead if
> `CVE_CHECK_IGNORE` is used. This is a depreacted variable and will
> result in a warning from the cve-check.class and
From: Simone Weiß
If a recipes was modified recommand the use of `CVE_STATUS` instead if
`CVE_CHECK_IGNORE` is used. This is a depreacted variable and will
result in a warning from the cve-check.class and should hence not be
used anymore. [YOCTO #15311]
Signed-off-by: Simone Weiß
---
