Package maintainers -- want test results by mail?

[Till Maas]

On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 01:25:01PM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 14:48 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:

> > yum.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/bash_completion.d/yum.bash
> > yum.noarch: E: non-executable-script 
> > /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/yum/repos.py 0644L /usr/bin/python

> Which of those messages do you consider noise and why?  Most of them
> look valid to me, though they are indeed nits.

Bash completion files are imho either always or never config files. So
it is either an error that needs to be fixed or not worth a warning.

And I doubt that python scripts in below
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages usually need to be executable. Since
yum works without any problems, these tons of errors are useless, too.
And they make it only harder to find real errors. I did not think more
about the other quoted rpmlint messages.

Regards
Till
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100602/09c85001/attachment.bin