[oe] bitbake does not fail when QA issues encountered

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2011/2/4 Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com>:
> On 02/03/2011 03:20 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 10:43:26AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/03/2011 12:09 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 08:02:44AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 01/27/2011 04:27 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that today we have QA Errors that are warnings
>>>>> (coreutils-native) and QA Errors that result in a non-zero exit code
>>>>> but
>>>>> also don't "kill the build" nor make it obvious at the end that there
>>>>> is
>>>>> a
>>>>> non-zero exit code (GNU_HASH, RPATH).  Finally we do have "kill the
>>>>> build"
>>>>> fatal checks in insane.bbclass, namely the do_qa_configure tests.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, I believe there was a simple error in the code which made QA
>>>> Error
>>>> on RPATH not kill the build[1]. BTW, GNU_HASH QA Error does stop the
>>>> build.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/42168
>>>
>>> Good spotting.  But.. GNU_HASH QA error will give you a non-zero exit
>>> code
>>> and not kill the build so we're back where we started, albeit with a less
>>> often hit in the community trigger (but I bet more often hit in private /
>>> 3rd party collections).
>>
>> So, do you ack the patch, should I push it in? It will break the build for
>> anyone still using libtool-2.2, specifically in gettext package...
>
> So, that would break angstrom-2008.1 so I don't think that's a great idea
> until we fix it..

Then again, if we push it there will be some incentive to fix it.

On a similar veign: I've reported some QA issues some time ago in
recipes that I have no affinity with, but they seem to be ignored.

Frans.