From 81bb14a93535da0fbf02ca715ac9ebdca3486732 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Yann E. MORIN" Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 22:21:52 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] utils/check-package: don't ignore check-package Commit 32934b526b64 (utils/checkpackagelib: check for Upstream trailers) introduced a new python module to check Upstream tags in patch files. In doing so, it introduced a flake8 coding style issue. That was not caught when applying the change, and neither was it caught by our daily checks, because the .checkpackagefile was regenerated right just in the next commit, to apply ignore patterns to existing patch files. It is a bit sad that one of our checks does not itself passes all our checks... Fix that trivial issue now. Signed-off-by: Yann E. MORIN --- .checkpackageignore | 1 - utils/checkpackagelib/lib_patch.py | 1 + 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/.checkpackageignore b/.checkpackageignore index b7d45df2a2..6f8d37feef 100644 --- a/.checkpackageignore +++ b/.checkpackageignore @@ -1462,4 +1462,3 @@ support/scripts/setlocalversion Shellcheck support/testing/tests/core/post-build.sh Shellcheck support/testing/tests/package/test_opkg/post-build.sh Shellcheck support/testing/tests/utils/test_get_developers/0001-package-binutils-change-.mk.patch NumberedSubject Upstream -utils/checkpackagelib/lib_patch.py Flake8 diff --git a/utils/checkpackagelib/lib_patch.py b/utils/checkpackagelib/lib_patch.py index 1909d3acd0..b01d28a7e7 100644 --- a/utils/checkpackagelib/lib_patch.py +++ b/utils/checkpackagelib/lib_patch.py @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ class Sob(_CheckFunction): "({}#_format_and_licensing_of_the_package_patches)" .format(self.filename, self.url_to_manual)] + class Upstream(_CheckFunction): UPSTREAM_ENTRY = re.compile(r"^Upstream: .*$")