Add a validation script for Makefile $(SOURCES) #5704
Merged
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
Add a validation script that checks that we haven't forgotten to add any new packages to the SOURCES definition in the top-level Makefile. Signed-off-by: Nalin Dahyabhai <[email protected]>
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: flouthoc, nalind The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/lgtm |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What type of PR is this?
/kind other
What this PR does / why we need it:
Add a validation script that checks that we haven't forgotten to add any new packages to the SOURCES definition in the top-level Makefile. Heavily based on review comments in #5496.
How to verify it
New validation test!
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
None
Special notes for your reviewer:
#5496 (review)
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?