On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 15:49 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> On a second thought, there's a more serious problem with this approach.
> If you misspell a negative selector, then CATS will run all the checks
> you didn't want, only to tell you that you made a mistake when it's
> done...
Agreed, made i
* Paul Wise , 2016-05-22, 21:38:
OTOH, this looks odd, because thisflagdoesnotexist is not a "skipped,
hidden, trimmed and work needing check".
Ack, I really need to find a better name for this section.
"Final remarks"? ;-)
On a second thought, there's a more serious problem with this approa
On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 15:33 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> OTOH, this looks odd, because thisflagdoesnotexist is not a "skipped,
> hidden, trimmed and work needing check".
Ack, I really need to find a better name for this section.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Desc
* Paul Wise , 2016-05-22, 21:15:
$ check-all-the-things -c thischeckdoesnotexist
Skipped, hidden, trimmed and work needing checks:
- cmdline disabled check: 7z-test acheck afl ansible-lint ...
- dangerous check: afl bfbtester lockdep perl-b-lint perl-syntax-check zzuf
- help needed: acheck ansibl
On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 14:36 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> CATS doesn't warn me if I select a check (or a flag, or a group) that
> doesn't exist. Instead, it just prints all the checks it didn't run
> (i.e. all of them):
I have a patch that does the following, would that work?
$ check-all-the-thin
Package: check-all-the-things
Version: 2015.12.10
Severity: minor
CATS doesn't warn me if I select a check (or a flag, or a group) that
doesn't exist. Instead, it just prints all the checks it didn't run
(i.e. all of them):
$ check-all-the-things -c thischeckdoesnotexist
Skipped and hidden ch
6 matches
Mail list logo
