-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Christian Iseli and I were discussing the possibility of automatically
> running rpmlint somehow.
Hey, thanks for posting this... I was just about to post such a message
I've tried to give some thought and get some feedback from the f-e-l list
Basically for each built package, I'd like to
- get rpmlint output, possibly comparing it against a reference output
if unknown problems have crept in
Getting the rpmlint output
is easy enough. Doing anything more than
that sounds like something out of the scope of mock.
- analyze the compiler warnings
- check the Provide'd things from the packages and compare against an
expected set of things provided
For starters, the whole bunch of tests would just generate a warning to
build submitter for things to verify.
Ah, we're talking automated test suite here. That's not mock.
Down the road, we might like to fail the build, or put the resulting
in a quarantine, if bad things are detected.
I had a first look at adding the checks in the plague builder, but after
discussing this a bit with Jason, probably a good parts of the checks
better performed while still in the mock buildroot...
My python skills are pretty much nil ATM, but I'm willing to learn too...
Any and all pieces of advice and/or code gladly accepted
I applaud your desire to automate this stuff, but I don't think that
mock is the right place for it. Mock is strictly a tool for managing a
chroot and building SRPMs in those chroots. Anything else just
introduces the potential for breaking builds and then Jeremy and Dan
start sending me nasty emails :).
That being said, I think it would be fairly straightforward to run
rpmlint on the generated RPMs and on the SRPM and stash the output
somewhere that's easily accessible. At that point you're talking about
writing an analysis tool to classify the output of a mock build.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----