From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tremer To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: Question regarding rootfile warning "Error! '/aarch64' in rootfiles files found!" Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 19:54:38 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <50d27cdb-d2aa-e4da-7b22-90cb453a545f@ipfire.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6633105878564758988==" List-Id: --===============6633105878564758988== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, > On 9 Dec 2021, at 19:52, Peter M=C3=BCller wro= te: >=20 > Hello Michael, >=20 > thanks for your reply. >=20 > As far as I understood the issue, make.sh checking for architecture names i= n paths > is fine, but in filenames (such as x86_64.h), it is not. A whitelist approa= ch would > not be necessary in this case, it only needs to ignore the file name of a g= iven path > while checking for architecture names. In this case it is, but generally it isn=E2=80=99t. The check was built for Perl and Python modules that carry the architecture n= ame in their paths. For Perl that is usually a directory and Python has it in= the filename. The idea is to catch any build problems if someone builds it on one architect= ure and doesn=E2=80=99t notice. I never notice. I do not think there is a technical solution to this. -Michael > Does this make sense? Or did I misunderstood you? >=20 > Thanks, and best regards, > Peter M=C3=BCller >=20 >=20 >> Hello, >>=20 >> What is the bug for? The check does exactly what it is supposed to do. >>=20 >> We either need to get rid of it entirely because it has false positives or= we need to have a whitelist. >>=20 >> Is that a solution that you had in mind? >>=20 >> -Michael >>=20 >>> On 9 Dec 2021, at 19:39, Peter M=C3=BCller w= rote: >>>=20 >>> P.S.: Bug #12743 (https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D12743) ha= s been raised for this. >>>=20 >>> Should anybody have spare time to work on it, please feel free to do so. = :-) >>>=20 >>>> Hello Adolf, >>>>=20 >>>> thanks for your reply. >>>>=20 >>>>> How should we deal with the situation where a source file filename happ= ens to use an architecture name the same as an IPFire name. >>>>=20 >>>> I also think this is a false positive, though it surprises me we never c= ame across this >>>> scenario all the years before. Either way, make.sh (or whatever's doing = this check) needs >>>> to be updated to ignore such cases. >>>>=20 >>>> I'll file a bug for this later... >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks, and best regards, >>>> Peter M=C3=BCller >>>>=20 >>=20 --===============6633105878564758988==--