[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Static code analysis task for make (#306)

[Jun Aruga]

> My previous comment was wrto adding static analysis instrumentation to rpmbuild for other packages.

Yeah, I knew that after reading your comment. `rpmbuild` and `rpmlint` are doing the analysis.
My proposal is about for static analysis on RPM itself, as you mentioned.

> For static analysis on RPM itself by adding make targets, then LCOV/GCOV coverage targets and adding test cases is usually more useful than static analysis warnings.

I agree with you.
Adding coverage test target is also useful for maintainability.

If "we do run static analyser from time to time locally.", I want to know the content as a make target.
I think we do not have to run those static analysis targets in CI as a first step.
Knowing the used analysis tools and the rules by configuration file makes us to contribute easily.
 
> Note that I have years of experience with static analysis tools applied to RPM sources ;-)

OK, let's promote it :)





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/306#issuecomment-323544604
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20170819/288b4128/attachment.html>