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 05-15-2012, 06:03 AM
Sune Vuorela
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On 2012-05-15, Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:
> Is there a rational behind not allowing any fuzz?

I think it makes perfect sense to expect the patches to apply perfectly,
so we don't rely on patch & quilt to be able to unfuzz things.

Especially when unfuzzing patches are so simple.

while quilt push ; do quilt refresh ; done
#sanitychecks
dch ... refresh patches


/Sune


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: slrnjr3scl.p7v.nospam@sshway.ssh.pusling.com">http ://lists.debian.org/slrnjr3scl.p7v.nospam@sshway.ssh.pusling.com
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:11 AM
Russ Allbery
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> writes:

> Is there a rational behind not allowing any fuzz?

Fuzz indicates that the source file has changed since the patch has been
generated, which means that the patch may no longer apply properly. Fuzz
is a guess of convenience by the patch program that the result is
*probably* what was intended.

But fuzz indicates there may be a problem; for example, I've seen patches
apply with fuzz that add duplicate lines to a file (because the lines were
added upstream in a different location), resulting in everything from
compilation errors to serious hidden bugs in the program.

Therefore, I think it makes sense to require the maintainer to confirm
that, yes, the patch applied with fuzz still makes the correct change and
isn't indicative of an error. A good way to indicate that is to unfuzz
the patch.

--
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
Archive: 87liku0y9w.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu">http://lists.debian.org/87liku0y9w.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:17 AM
Norbert Preining
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On Mo, 14 Mai 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> isn't indicative of an error. A good way to indicate that is to unfuzz
> the patch.

Or build a source and binary package, do normal testing *as*usual*
and upload ...

No, I hereby start saying good by to 3.0

Best wishes

Norbert
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norbert Preining preining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
------------------------------------------------------------------------
KIRBY MISPERTON (n.)
One who kindly attempts to wipe an apparent kirby (q.v.) off another's
face with a napkin, and then discovers it to be a wart or other
permanent fixture, is said to have committed a 'kirby misperton'.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120515061717.GG19404@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at">h ttp://lists.debian.org/20120515061717.GG19404@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:18 AM
Jonathan Nieder
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

Hi,

(Caveat: I am not a dpkg-source maintainer.)

Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2012-05-15, Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:

>> Is there a rational behind not allowing any fuzz?
>
> I think it makes perfect sense to expect the patches to apply perfectly,
> so we don't rely on patch & quilt to be able to unfuzz things.

Indeed, unfuzzing involves guessing where the patch is supposed to
apply, and different versions of GNU patch (which is what quilt uses)
may make different guesses as patch gets smarter. The same source
package producing a different unpacked result depending on the tools
in the surrounding environment does not sound like fun to me.

I can imagine dpkg-source or wrappers like git-buildpackage learning
to automatically refresh patches when generating the source package if
requested to do so, so it would only have to make the guess once.
Perhaps someone would like to work on that?

Thanks,
Jonathan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120515061800.GA11441@burratino">http://lists.debian.org/20120515061800.GA11441@burratino
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:27 AM
"Daniel Leidert"
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

Russ Allbery wrote:
> Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> writes:
>
> > Is there a rational behind not allowing any fuzz?
>
> Fuzz indicates that the source file has changed since the patch has been
> generated, which means that the patch may no longer apply properly. Fuzz
> is a guess of convenience by the patch program that the result is
> *probably* what was intended.
>
> But fuzz indicates there may be a problem; for example, I've seen patches
> apply with fuzz that add duplicate lines to a file (because the lines were
> added upstream in a different location), resulting in everything from
> compilation errors to serious hidden bugs in the program.
>
> Therefore, I think it makes sense to require the maintainer to confirm
> that, yes, the patch applied with fuzz still makes the correct change and
> isn't indicative of an error. A good way to indicate that is to unfuzz
> the patch.

JFTR: Doing `quilt refresh' won't preserve the above described issue.
You can only avouid this by reporting issues upstream and tracking their
status or by checking the necessity of every patch with every new upstream
version.

Regards, Daniel
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120515062713.3740@gmx.net">http://lists.debian.org/20120515062713.3740@gmx.net
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:27 AM
Russ Allbery
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> writes:
> On Mo, 14 Mai 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> isn't indicative of an error. A good way to indicate that is to unfuzz
>> the patch.

> Or build a source and binary package, do normal testing *as*usual*
> and upload ...

There was a reason why I added the word "subtle" in front of serious bugs.
Duplicate code (the biggest risk of fuzzed patches) can do weird stuff,
like create odd memory leaks or nasty heisenbugs (think of duplicating
part of a mutex segment).

It only takes a minute to unfuzz a patch, if that, and nearly all that
time is spent inspecting the patch to be sure that it can be unfuzzed
safely.

quilt push -a

Look for fuzzy patch warnings. For each fuzzy patch:

quilt pop <patch>
# inspect the fuzzy files to be sure everything is as expected
quilt refresh

Then:

quilt pop -a
svn commit # or VCS of your choice

Of all the things that one has to do with a package, this is pretty minor.

--
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
Archive: 87fwb20xiw.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu">http://lists.debian.org/87fwb20xiw.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:40 PM.

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