Re: guix lint should support overrides

[Maxime Devos]

On 24-08-2022 10:08, zimoun wrote:

> Hi Vagrant,
>
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 15:22, Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> wrote:
>
> > But, because there is no way to silence a particular inappropriate
> > suggestion from guix lint, it becomes noise, and each person evaluating
> > the results of the package in the future then needs to take time to
> > figure out if guix lint is wrong, or something should be changed.
> >       
> Do you have some packages as example?  In order to be concrete about the
> false-positive and how to programatically fix them.
>
> For instance, do you mean exclude on specific checker for one specific
> package?  Or teach one specific checker for one specific package in
> order to avoid an error specific to this package running this specific
> checker?
>

Myself (not Vagrant) I was thinking of the gnu-description linter.

IIRC, there was some package where I proposed to modify the description a little to be more informative and fit better in Guix, but then the gnu-description proposed to use the upstream description. Consequently, it was decided to use the original, IMO worse, description.

Unfortunately I cannot find the relevant e-mails anymore.

This was a true positive, not a false positive, but I think it would have been useful to silence the linter there anyway.

At least for these kind of cases, I would go for a package property (properties '((silence-linters gnu-description))).

Greetings,
Maxime.

OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature