On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 12:46:23 +0100 justin <j...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 12/16/11 12:21 PM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > > On Friday 16 December 2011 06:10:13 Anthony G. Basile wrote: > >> Does your script do any checking on the quality of the ebuild, eg > >> that it respects C/LDFLAGS. If so, that's useful and would help > >> package maintainers to better prepare their ebuilds for > >> stabilization. > > Unfortunately no. > > > > For LDFLAGS there is a QA warning and is enough visible > > For CFLAGS I see with the naked eye a bit of build log > > My script at "end of work" just runs repoman full and cat entire > > ebuild( so, imho, should be a tasks already done by maintainers). > > Finally, I take a look at the ebuild to see if there are issue(s) > > > > This is all. > > > >> And congrats on making dev > > Thanks ;) > > > > > > Regards > > Agostino > > You can use the post* hooks for that. For FLAGS mixing I am using > CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS specific warning flags during compilation and > grep for the gcc mixing warning in the build log. Probably similar > things can be done for other problematic points. There was also a > more sophisticated approach Diego blogged about. > > For respecting C/CXXFLAGS there was something Donnie suggested long > ago. If you use -frecord-gcc-switches you are able to read the used > LFGAS with eu-readelf.
That sounds neat. Maybe we should make portage optionally support it for now (i.e. when user uses such a flag him-/herself)? Sadly, I don't see a neat way of splitting those switches between separate files being built. But better that than nothing, I guess. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
