On 2025-08-20 05:40, 'Schmidt, Adriaan' via isar-users wrote:
> > > I am wondering if a specific styleguide exists for isar? Normally for
> > > bitbake based projects I am using oelint-adv.
> > >
> > > When I played around with dpkg-raw and wanted to install some file
> > > under /etc, this caused the linker to complain about not using
> > > sysconfdir for etc.
>
> Well, yes and no...
> Years ago I very briefly looked into technical solutions for bitbake linting (maybe it was oelint-adv, but I don't exactly remember), and how flexible/extensible those might be.
> Even with that in place, it would be up to the Isar Community to actually define a style and rules, but as far as I'm aware nothing like this exists yet.
>
> > > Is there a specific reason why isars bitbake.conf would omit to also
> > > define variables got etc, bin and friends?
We've looked at pylint but not at oelint-adv.
Ideally, we imagined our recipes as three-liners (inherit dpkg, SRC_URI, SRCREV
or similar) which wouldn't require much of style. In the (very distant) future,
we'd need automatically created recipes or even not need recipes at all (all
necessary metadata is already inside the Debian-style source packages). This
not being the case today :) , I think oelint-adv could be evaluated whether
it's useful and configurable enough for Isar. Experiences welcome.
Regarding your specific questions -- sysconfdir, etc, bin and friends -- those
vars are very OE-specific and in are in case of Isar all managed by the Debian
package building infrastructure. So my wish would be exactly about it -- if the
tool turns to be useful for Isar, we shouldn't force people to deal with many
false positives.
Other than that, seems that the tool is not intended to provide pure formatting
guidance, but also real style guidance -- in that case, I think major effort
would be needed to make it useful to check for Isar development patterns.
With kind regards,
Baurzhan