Dne 23.1.2018 v 10:38 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> and we can ignore rpmlint complaints?
The problem is that some developers often do not run rpmlint after every change
(including me).
What I would like to see is to have mandatory checks after mock build. It is
tracked here:
https://github.com/rp
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 08:55:03AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 05:36:56PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > * Removes exectuable bit (and shows warning) for files where there are no
> > shebang
>
> The way this is written implies that ordinary (eg ELF) executables
> wi
On 01/23/2018 10:55 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 05:36:56PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
* Removes exectuable bit (and shows warning) for files where there are no
shebang
The way this is written implies that ordinary (eg ELF) executables
will be broken by this change, w
Does it mean we don't have to fix the shebangs in .spec files and we can
ignore rpmlint complaints?
Vít
Dne 22.1.2018 v 17:36 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a):
> Hello,
>
> I'm planning to merge PR[0] somewhere later this week. Essentially it
> does:
>
> For each executable files:
> * Replaces /usr/bin/e
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 05:36:56PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> * Removes exectuable bit (and shows warning) for files where there are no
> shebang
The way this is written implies that ordinary (eg ELF) executables
will be broken by this change, which I'm assuming/hoping is not the
case.
I'm con
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hello,
I'm planning to merge PR[0] somewhere later this week. Essentially it does:
For each executable files:
* Replaces /usr/bin/env foo with /usr/bin/foo
* Replaces /usr/bin/python with /usr/bin/python2
* Removes exectuable bit (and shows warning
