Indentation fixes #3
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Added. Thanks! |
dmnks
referenced
this pull request
in dmnks/rpm
Mar 22, 2021
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: rpm-software-management#793
dmnks
referenced
this pull request
in dmnks/rpm
Mar 22, 2021
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: rpm-software-management#793
dmnks
referenced
this pull request
in dmnks/rpm
Mar 22, 2021
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: rpm-software-management#793
pmatilai
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2021
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: #793
dmnks
referenced
this pull request
in dmnks/rpm
Jun 7, 2022
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: rpm-software-management#793 (cherry picked from commit 7fd7a60)
dmnks
referenced
this pull request
in dmnks/rpm
Jun 7, 2022
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: rpm-software-management#793 (cherry picked from commit 7fd7a60)
dmnks
referenced
this pull request
in dmnks/rpm
Jun 7, 2022
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: rpm-software-management#793 (cherry picked from commit 7fd7a60)
dmnks
referenced
this pull request
in dmnks/rpm
Jun 8, 2022
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: rpm-software-management#793 (cherry picked from commit 7fd7a60)
dmnks
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 1, 2022
Confusingly, the "RPM build errors" section also includes messages logged as warnings. That gives the false impression that they somehow contributed to the actual build failure and therefore were turned into errors. This appears to be a historical artifact; when a message passes through the logging system and is of the priority RPMLOG_WARNING or higher, we save it in a global buffer (ctx->recs), which is then simply dumped with rpmlogPrint() in the error summary. This was probably good enough when the summary was introduced (commit f2efc72, year 2000), as there were almost no warnings generated by RPM at that time, however as they became more abundant, the summary code was never revisited. There are 3 ways to fix this discrepancy: 1) Change the summary's title to "RPM build problems" 2) Remove the summary altogether 3) Don't show warnings in it Options #1 and #2 would be too disruptive. The error summary needs to stay as is, for the following reasons: - While it usually just repeats the last error, not all errors terminate a build right away, so those can get drown in the output that follows after. Examples: "File not found" in rpmInstall(), or macro expansion errors (note: we may have these terminate a build in the future). - It makes it immediately obvious that something went wrong when examining build logs, and the title "RPM build errors" undoubtedly has become the de-facto text string to search for. That leaves us with option #3. To further lessen the disruption, do keep a summary of warnings, but put them under their own heading, and only show it on build failures. That way, we restrict all the extra verbosity to error time (as it is now) and don't pollute the output of otherwise good builds. There may be packages with long-standing warnings that are not feasible to fix for any reason, and having an indented block of text resembling "RPM build errors" at the end of every build would do no good. Effectively, this commit is just cosmetic - it splits the error summary into two, without any functional or API changes (apart from two function additions). Fixes: #793 (cherry picked from commit 7fd7a60)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.