On Sunday 06,September,2009 12:30 AM, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > At Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:13:00 +0800, > Chow Loong Jin wrote: >> >> [1 <text/plain; UTF-8 (quoted-printable)>] >> On Thursday 03,September,2009 10:50 PM, Junichi Uekawa wrote: >>> Isn't it better to use C10shell instead of ignoring errors? >>> >> C10shell doesn't get invoked when a hook dies. Also, there are many cases >> where >> you don't want a shell to be spawned just because of a few lintian errors. >> Generally, at least for me, inspecting the resultant debs can already show >> what's wrong. But aside from that, anything that doesn't result in my built >> debs >> being purged due to lintian errors would satisfy me already. Perhaps pbuilder >> should instead be tweaked to not purge debs if a hook dies? > > I find a behavior to not fail at all when lintian fails to be wrong, > that's ignoring lintian warnings for everybody; so your patch doesn't > look quite correct. If I'm not mistaken, B90lintian's purpose is to just print out the lintian warnings onto the build log output, right? The patch would enable the warnings to still be printed out, although it won't cause pbuilder to die a miserable death. > > However, there should be a better behavior than the current behavior. > > Should fixing C10shell to be invoked when hooks fail be useful? It might be, but I'd rather prefer B90lintian to not cause pbuilder to die a miserable death.
How about making pbuilder copy the resultant debs to $BUILDRESULT as long as the package builds fine, regardless of whether hooks die? Then perhaps using a certain exit code to show that a hook has died so that people can test the return code of pbuilder? -- Kind regards, Chow Loong Jin (GPG: 0x8F02A411) Ubuntu Contributing Developer
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
