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, 06:33 AM
Andreas Tille
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:17:17PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> 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 ...

Hmmm, what exactly is "normal testing *as*usual*"? Isn't it a duty of
the maintainer to inspect critical parts of the code? IMHO existing
patches are a perfect sign for a critical part of the code and leaving a
fuzzy patch implies you did not spended time on investigating the code.
A clean patch is somehow a tickmark "Yes, I've checked this problematic
piece of code". I really like this sensible behavour of dpkg-*.

Kind regards

Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120515063258.GA3979@an3as.eu">http://lists.debian.org/20120515063258.GA3979@an3as.eu
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:39 AM
Norbert Preining
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On Mo, 14 Mai 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Of all the things that one has to do with a package, this is pretty minor.

If you are talking of a normal small package. Not of 2.6G of packages
where even the source packages are *generated*, and unfuzzying is a
process that takes quite some time.

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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
KELLING (participial vb.)
A person searching for something, who has reached the futile stage of
re-looking in all the places they have looked once already, is said to
be kelling.
--- 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: 20120515063956.GH19404@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at">h ttp://lists.debian.org/20120515063956.GH19404@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:54 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:

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

> If you are talking of a normal small package. Not of 2.6G of packages
> where even the source packages are *generated*, and unfuzzying is a
> process that takes quite some time.

If you don't care about checking the patches, it takes fifteen minutes one
time to write a shell script and then less than ten seconds to run it
before you do an upload.

Something like (untested):

quilt pop -a
while ! quilt push -a --fuzz=0 ; do
quilt push
quilt refresh
done
quilt pop -a
svn commit -m "Unfuzzed all patches"

would probably do it.

--
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: 87aa1a0wa2.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu">http://lists.debian.org/87aa1a0wa2.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:56 AM
Norbert Preining
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

Hi,

On Di, 15 Mai 2012, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hmmm, what exactly is "normal testing *as*usual*"? Isn't it a duty of

Like I have, a test bed testing various upgrade and install scenaria
from stable/testing/sid.

> the maintainer to inspect critical parts of the code? IMHO existing

Not all patches are for *code*. comments in config files etc etc.

The whole point is: this behaviour declares developers uncapable of
deciding by themselves!

I want decide *myself* when I unfuzzify. Not dpkg-source.
dpkg-source should do its work, and nothing else. Not
taking over *my* responsability in checking this, because it is not
a check, at all. Let us make a small Gedankenexperiment:

According to many of these suggestions here I should run something
like quilt push ; quilt refresh; ... for all patches regularly,
or in a script. That only *hides* the fact that there was a fuzz.
What is better? A patch that tells me that it is fuzzy or a patch
that is wasted and destroyed to a automatic quilt push ; refresh
that moves the patch around?

This behaviour as advertised here to unfuzzify patches is actually
counter-productive.

No, it is taking over responsability that is and should only be in
the developers hand.

If we continue in this way, what is next? We have to name patches in
a very specific way? Or what other funny rules and regulations
are there created.

I don't know who is writing this and whether this is his spare time or
he is emplyoed for that. But I am using my free time and that is rare,
and I want to decide by myself, not be forced to do things how
dpkg maintainers thought it is a good idea.
(what is next? dpkg-source checking that we are not running under X
not to be distracted? Or checking our passwd file that not more than
one user is active? just to name a few development ideas!)

Anyway, I will migrate away from 3.0 as far as possible.

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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCRABSTER (n.)
One of those dogs which has it off on your leg during tea.
--- 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: 20120515065614.GI19404@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at">h ttp://lists.debian.org/20120515065614.GI19404@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:59 AM
Norbert Preining
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On Mo, 14 Mai 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> If you don't care about checking the patches, it takes fifteen minutes one
> time to write a shell script and then less than ten seconds to run it
> before you do an upload.

See my other answer. This is conceptually wrong, because you might
end up with a *wrong* patch and the old one is destroyed due to the
refresh (patch just messed it up .. and I didn't realize it, uuups).

I am against this kind of automatism. I prefer to be *reminded* that
there is something worth looking into. And I can decide myself that
if in this patch there is a off-by-one, I don't need to check.
But in other patches I have to check.

Again, my responsability, that is what I want. Not dpkg-source holding
my hand like a baby: "don't don't don't do that!"

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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPROSTON GREEN (n.)
The violent colour of one of Nigel Rees's jackets, worn when he thinks
he's being elegant.
--- 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: 20120515065931.GJ19404@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at">h ttp://lists.debian.org/20120515065931.GJ19404@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
 
Old 05-15-2012, 07:10 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:

>> If you don't care about checking the patches, it takes fifteen minutes
>> one time to write a shell script and then less than ten seconds to run
>> it before you do an upload.

> See my other answer. This is conceptually wrong, because you might
> end up with a *wrong* patch and the old one is destroyed due to the
> refresh (patch just messed it up .. and I didn't realize it, uuups).

> I am against this kind of automatism. I prefer to be *reminded* that
> there is something worth looking into.

In your previous message, it sounded like you weren't concerned about the
fuzz because you trusted your testing process. Apparently you feel this
does require manual inspection after all?

I'm confused by the idea that you are opposed to silencing the warning
because you know it's something that you need to look at, but you're
extremely angry that dpkg-source wants you to look at it before you upload
to the archive. If you're going to need to look at it eventually, why not
before you upload it for installation on other people's machines?

Anyway, if you want to clear the fuzz but record that the patch may
require further attention, that's also pretty trivial:

quilt push > fuzz
(echo '; echo "Patch was fuzzy on" `date`; cat fuzz) | quilt header -a
rm fuzz
quilt refresh

to add the fuzzy output from the patch to the patch header for later
inspection.

> Again, my responsability, that is what I want. Not dpkg-source holding
> my hand like a baby: "don't don't don't do that!"

Maybe it's because I do software development as my day job and am a huge
fan of test-driven development, but I'm generally in favor of software
holding my hand like a baby and telling me that I didn't run the test
suite, didn't make all the tests pass, or introduced warnings. It
prevents me from doing things for the sake of expediency that waste huge
amounts of my time later. That's why I use Lintian, turn on all the
compiler warnings, and so forth.

I think you're arguing that a fuzzy patch is probably only a minor issue
and therefore shouldn't result in essentially a package rejection by
dpkg-source, but the alternative is for dpkg-source to do something that's
essentially unsafe. I appreciate it erring on the side of caution and
requiring that someone investigate.

--
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: 871uml2a40.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu">http://lists.debian.org/871uml2a40.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu
 
Old 05-15-2012, 07:20 AM
Andrey Rahmatullin
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:59:31PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> See my other answer. This is conceptually wrong, because you might
> end up with a *wrong* patch and the old one is destroyed due to the
> refresh (patch just messed it up .. and I didn't realize it, uuups).
Why don't you use a VCS?

--
WBR, wRAR
 
Old 05-15-2012, 09:10 AM
Jon Dowland
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:17:17PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> No, I hereby start saying good by to 3.0

I'm hoping we can revisit 3.0 (git) post-squeeze, myself. But I have also
found myself to be incompatible iwth 3.0 (quilt) and used 1.0 for my last
few packages.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120515091028.GB24635@debian">http://lists.debian.org/20120515091028.GB24635@debian
 
Old 05-16-2012, 09:45 AM
Bastien ROUCARIES
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Jon Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:17:17PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
>> No, I hereby start saying good by to 3.0
>
> I'm hoping we can revisit 3.0 (git) post-squeeze, myself. But I have also
> found myself to be incompatible iwth 3.0 (quilt) and used 1.0 for my last
> few packages.

You could use gitpkg with a quilt export hook. i use it regularly with
imagemagick and it work perfectly (it is gitpkg over git over svn).

Bastien
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120515091028.GB24635@debian
>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAE2SPAaMrJR2y15X0OKteGT47SZ1Ej=QG=V++iywSTKvuOdua A@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAE2SPAaMrJR2y15X0OKteGT47SZ1Ej=QG=V++iywSTKvuOdua A@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 05-16-2012, 10:38 AM
Adam Borowski
 
Default why do people introduce stup^Wstrange changes to quilt 3.0 format

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:10:28AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:17:17PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > No, I hereby start saying good by to 3.0
>
> I'm hoping we can revisit 3.0 (git) post-squeeze, myself. But I have also
> found myself to be incompatible iwth 3.0 (quilt) and used 1.0 for my last
> few packages.

I can't see any reason to use 1.0 anymore, ever.

It is true that 3.0 (quilt) does have a great downside, quilt, but it also
has a number of upsides. And working around quilt is simple:

echo "single-debian-patch" >debian/source/options
echo "/.pc" >>.gitignore
echo "/debian/patches" >>.gitignore

and perhaps "rm -rf .pc debian/patches" in the clean target if those bother
you -- and you have all the goodies that come with the 3.0 format, with
getting none of quilt brain damage onto you. Suddenly, nothing conflicts
with the VCS you're using, nothing breaks bisects, nothing causes spurious
recompiles, etc.

Except for nuking upstream debian/ dir which can mean a bit of lost work if
the upstream is sane (and can save some if they're not), the 3.0 format is
strictly better than 1.0.

--
“This is gonna be as easy as cheating on an ethics exam!”
-Cerise Brightmoon
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:47 AM.

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