FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-12-2008, 11:50 PM
Raphael Geissert
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

Hi all,

Probably a week or two ago I contacted Lucas Nussbaum to ask him if he could
run lintian on the results of his packages rebuild so they could be compared
against the results from lintian.d.o to detect package changes (i.e. new or
less lintian-detected issues).

I have just started to compare the data and already found some package changes
which I'll be posting some time soon.

But my question is: how should we proceed? Here are the options (I can think
about):

* MBF based on the issues found (when lintian reports more issues on the
rebuilt package) [1] .
* Trigger binNMU's for the affected packages (when lintian reports less issues
on the rebuilt package) [2].

What does the, BCC'ed, RT think about this? and what do others think?

Because some packages FTBFS, there are some missing build logs[3], and because
there are some manpage warnings that are/not found either on lintian.d.o's
results or the archive rebuild's results I can't even estimate the number of
affected packages.

[1] An example would be "ace-of-penguins": running lintian on the package from
the archive only detects two issues, but on the rebuilt package it detects
24.
[2] Haven't found any example of these, yet.
[3] At least aboot's is missing, already notified Lucas.

Cheers,
--
Atomo64 - Raphael

Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
 
Old 07-13-2008, 01:58 AM
Raphael Geissert
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

Raphael Geissert wrote:
> [2] Haven't found any example of these, yet.

Here's one:

$ diff -u xabacus_7.1.7-1_i386.lintian xabacus_7.1.7-1+b1_i386.lintian
--- xabacus_7.1.7-1_i386.lintian 2008-07-12 20:52:30.000000000 -0500
+++ xabacus_7.1.7-1+b1_i386.lintian 2008-07-12 20:52:38.000000000 -0500
@@ -10,8 +10,6 @@
I: xabacus: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man6/xabacus.6.gz:41
I: xabacus: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man6/xabacus.6.gz 6 more occurrences not shown
W: xabacus: doc-base-unknown-section xabacus:6 Apps/Math
-W: xabacus: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/applications/xabacus.desktop
-E: xabacus: executable-desktop-file /usr/share/applications/xabacus.desktop 0755
I: xabacus: desktop-entry-contains-encoding-key /usr/share/applications/xabacus.desktop:12 Encoding
W: xabacus: desktop-entry-invalid-category X /usr/share/applications/xabacus.desktop
W: xabacus: menu-item-uses-apps-section /usr/share/menu/xabacus:3
@@ -19,4 +17,3 @@
W: xabacus: description-contains-homepage
W: xabacus: package-relation-with-self provides: xabacus
W: xabacus: package-relation-with-self replaces: xabacus
-W: xabacus: spelling-error-in-changelog suport support

Note that spelling error was *not* fixed by rebuilding.
Lintian does only check the latest changelog entry and doesn't care
whether it it was from a maintainer upload, NMU, or binNMU.

Cheers,
Raphael



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-13-2008, 10:23 AM
Frank Lichtenheld
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 08:58:56PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > [2] Haven't found any example of these, yet.
>
> Here's one:
>
> $ diff -u xabacus_7.1.7-1_i386.lintian xabacus_7.1.7-1+b1_i386.lintian
> --- xabacus_7.1.7-1_i386.lintian 2008-07-12 20:52:30.000000000 -0500
> +++ xabacus_7.1.7-1+b1_i386.lintian 2008-07-12 20:52:38.000000000 -0500
> @@ -10,8 +10,6 @@
> I: xabacus: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man6/xabacus.6.gz:41
> I: xabacus: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man6/xabacus.6.gz 6 more occurrences not shown
> W: xabacus: doc-base-unknown-section xabacus:6 Apps/Math
> -W: xabacus: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/applications/xabacus.desktop
> -E: xabacus: executable-desktop-file /usr/share/applications/xabacus.desktop 0755
> I: xabacus: desktop-entry-contains-encoding-key /usr/share/applications/xabacus.desktop:12 Encoding
> W: xabacus: desktop-entry-invalid-category X /usr/share/applications/xabacus.desktop
> W: xabacus: menu-item-uses-apps-section /usr/share/menu/xabacus:3

I would think that issues like this don't really warrant binNMUs,
especially if you wind up doing a very large number of them.

Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org>
www: http://www.djpig.de/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-13-2008, 07:53 PM
Lucas Nussbaum
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

On 12/07/08 at 18:50 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Because some packages FTBFS, there are some missing build logs[3], and
> because there are some manpage warnings that are/not found either on
> lintian.d.o's results or the archive rebuild's results I can't even
> estimate the number of affected packages.
>
> [3] At least aboot's is missing, already notified Lucas.

aboot is listed in Packages-arch-specific[1] as being for alpha only, so
I'm not trying to build it.

Some other packages might be missing, because:
- they FTBFS
- their build time out, so they are excluded from my rebuilds
- they are listed in P-a-s as not for i386
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
 
Old 07-13-2008, 08:18 PM
Russ Allbery
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

Raphael Geissert <atomo64@gmail.com> writes:

> Because some packages FTBFS, there are some missing build logs[3], and
> because there are some manpage warnings that are/not found either on
> lintian.d.o's results or the archive rebuild's results I can't even
> estimate the number of affected packages.

Man page warnings unfortunately depend on the version of man that you have
installed. lintian.d.o's results therefore miss quite a few warnings,
since lintian.d.o runs on stable and the man version there is too old to
be able to meaningfully diagnose many problems.

--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-13-2008, 09:42 PM
Luk Claes
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Hi all,

Hi

> * MBF based on the issues found (when lintian reports more issues on the
> rebuilt package) [1] .

No

MBF shouldn't be done for lintian warnings/errors unless the particular
warning/error is discussed on d-devel and the consensus is that it's
worth to MBF for...

> * Trigger binNMU's for the affected packages (when lintian reports less issues
> on the rebuilt package) [2].

No, we are not going to binNMU to get less lintian warnings/errors
unless you could convince us it's worth it for particular classes of
problems.

Cheers

Luk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-15-2008, 09:33 AM
Steve Langasek
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 09:53:30PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 12/07/08 at 18:50 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > Because some packages FTBFS, there are some missing build logs[3], and
> > because there are some manpage warnings that are/not found either on
> > lintian.d.o's results or the archive rebuild's results I can't even
> > estimate the number of affected packages.

> > [3] At least aboot's is missing, already notified Lucas.

> aboot is listed in Packages-arch-specific[1] as being for alpha only, so
> I'm not trying to build it.

The binary is listed in P-a-s. The source package builds multiple binaries,
including some on archs other than alpha.

So your parsing of P-a-s does not match that used by wanna-build, which
understands this and successfully passes aboot to the autobuilders.

--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-15-2008, 10:52 AM
Lucas Nussbaum
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

On 15/07/08 at 10:33 +0100, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 09:53:30PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > On 12/07/08 at 18:50 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > > Because some packages FTBFS, there are some missing build logs[3], and
> > > because there are some manpage warnings that are/not found either on
> > > lintian.d.o's results or the archive rebuild's results I can't even
> > > estimate the number of affected packages.
>
> > > [3] At least aboot's is missing, already notified Lucas.
>
> > aboot is listed in Packages-arch-specific[1] as being for alpha only, so
> > I'm not trying to build it.
>
> The binary is listed in P-a-s. The source package builds multiple binaries,
> including some on archs other than alpha.
>
> So your parsing of P-a-s does not match that used by wanna-build, which
> understands this and successfully passes aboot to the autobuilders.

Right, should be fixed now.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-15-2008, 06:43 PM
Raphael Geissert
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

Thanks to everyone for their comments.

Thinking a little bit more, I believe writing some kind of report might be
of more use. Of course if I find something really relevant I might end up
filing a couple of bugs (I remember seeing something that looked like a
library name being changed in the rebuilt package).

Hope nobody will object if the report is sent in the next Misc Developer
News .

Cheers,
Raphael



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-15-2008, 06:44 PM
Raphael Geissert
 
Default Changes detected by lintian on rebuilt packages

Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

> On 12/07/08 at 18:50 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> Because some packages FTBFS, there are some missing build logs[3], and
>> because there are some manpage warnings that are/not found either on
>> lintian.d.o's results or the archive rebuild's results I can't even
>> estimate the number of affected packages.
>>
>> [3] At least aboot's is missing, already notified Lucas.
>
> aboot is listed in Packages-arch-specific[1] as being for alpha only, so
> I'm not trying to build it.
>
> Some other packages might be missing, because:
> - they FTBFS

Yes, I noticed that and built a list of packages that FTBFS to ease the
examination of the results.

> - their build time out, so they are excluded from my rebuilds

Oh, good to know.

> - they are listed in P-a-s as not for i386



Cheers,
Raphael


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:20 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org