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 dpkg

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-28-2012, 10:40 AM
Neil McGovern
 
Default Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)

On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 11:59:07AM +0200, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 07:18:29PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 17:51:56 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > > Nope, 1.16.5. I'd like to see that to get a view as to why 1.16.5 was
> > > broken. Once we've managed to have a look at that, it may give a clue as
> > > to if it's worth reviewing the giant-diff-from-doom.
> >
> > Thanks, attached the filtered diff (with additional junk left by
> > filterdiff, but left the changelog) from git:
> >
>
> Right, the delta diff was small enough that I actually put in the time
> to look at the full diff. This took a number of hours, but anyway:
>

Oh, and also, I want to see a specific ack/nack from the SRMs for:
--- dpkg-1.16.4.3/debian/source/options 2012-06-09 14:32:05.000000000 +0000
+++ dpkg-1.16.8/debian/source/options 2012-07-19 12:27:34.000000000 +0000
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
-# Use bzip2 compression by default, we save 2.5Mb
-compression = "bzip2"
+# Use xz compression by default, we save 4.6 MiB
+compression = "xz"

Neil
--
 
Old 07-28-2012, 10:45 AM
"Adam D. Barratt"
 
Default Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)

On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 12:40 +0200, Neil McGovern wrote:
> Oh, and also, I want to see a specific ack/nack from the SRMs for:
> --- dpkg-1.16.4.3/debian/source/options 2012-06-09 14:32:05.000000000 +0000
> +++ dpkg-1.16.8/debian/source/options 2012-07-19 12:27:34.000000000 +0000
> @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
> -# Use bzip2 compression by default, we save 2.5Mb
> -compression = "bzip2"
> +# Use xz compression by default, we save 4.6 MiB
> +compression = "xz"

afaics, this is just the "upstream" dpkg tarball changing compression
method. Does anything actually care about that?

Regards,

Adam


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1343472337.18013.49.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org">http://lists.debian.org/1343472337.18013.49.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
 
Old 07-28-2012, 01:21 PM
Jonathan Nieder
 
Default Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)

Hi,

Neil McGovern wrote:

> dpkg-1.16.8/dpkg-deb/main.c
> -" -h|--help Show this help message.
"
> -" --version Show the version.
"
> +" -?, --help Show this help message.
"
> +" --version Show the version.
"
> Why are you removing -h?

I'll leave this one for Guillem.

> dpkg-1.16.8/lib/dpkg/ar.c
> + if (strlen(name) > 15)
> + ohshit(_("ar member name '%s' length too long"), name);
> + if (size > 9999999999L)
> + ohshit(_("ar member size %jd too large"), size);
> +
> Why 9999999999?

In the common ar format, the member size is stored as a 10-byte
character array as a decimal integer (padded on the right with
spaces). The maximum value that can be represented is

10^10 - 1 = 9 999 999 999.

Now a person might worry for a moment: since log2(10) is a little more
than 3.3, isn't 10^10 around 2^33, which is larger than can be
represented in a "long" on 32-bit architectures? Luckily dpkg uses
C99, where this is automatically treated as a "long long" literal when
appropriate.

> dpkg-1.16.8/scripts/Dpkg/Deps.pm
> - (any) # architecture name
> + ([a-zA-Z0-9][a-zA-Z0-9-]*) # architecture name
> Why the additional restriction?

It's a loosening. Previously the only permitted
architecture-qualified dependency was ":any".

> *.gmo - are you sure you're meant to be shipping these in the tarball?

I also dislike that convention, but it's what gettextized projects do
by default. See

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2007-08/msg00024.html

Thanks,
Jonathan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120728132123.GA9715@burratino
 
Old 07-28-2012, 05:31 PM
Guillem Jover
 
Default Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)

On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 11:45:37 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 12:40 +0200, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > Oh, and also, I want to see a specific ack/nack from the SRMs for:
> > --- dpkg-1.16.4.3/debian/source/options 2012-06-09 14:32:05.000000000 +0000
> > +++ dpkg-1.16.8/debian/source/options 2012-07-19 12:27:34.000000000 +0000
> > @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
> > -# Use bzip2 compression by default, we save 2.5Mb
> > -compression = "bzip2"
> > +# Use xz compression by default, we save 4.6 MiB
> > +compression = "xz"
>
> afaics, this is just the "upstream" dpkg tarball changing compression
> method. Does anything actually care about that?

Exactly, in Debian this should not affect anything AFAIK, the only
ones who might be “affected” are dpkg downstreams, and the ones I'm
tracking do not seem to have complained; but then they always have
the option to repack the tarball.

thanks,
guillem


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120728173149.GA14357@gaara.hadrons.org">http://lists.debian.org/20120728173149.GA14357@gaara.hadrons.org
 
Old 07-28-2012, 05:52 PM
Guillem Jover
 
Default Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)

On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 11:59:07 +0200, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 07:18:29PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 17:51:56 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > > Nope, 1.16.5. I'd like to see that to get a view as to why 1.16.5 was
> > > broken. Once we've managed to have a look at that, it may give a clue as
> > > to if it's worth reviewing the giant-diff-from-doom.
> >
> > Thanks, attached the filtered diff (with additional junk left by
> > filterdiff, but left the changelog) from git:
>
> Right, the delta diff was small enough that I actually put in the time
> to look at the full diff. This took a number of hours, but anyway:

Well then, thanks for taking the time.

> Some questions:
> dpkg-1.16.8/dpkg-deb/main.c
> -" -h|--help Show this help message.
"
> -" --version Show the version.
"
> +" -?, --help Show this help message.
"
> +" --version Show the version.
"
> Why are you removing -h?

Using -h (or -H) on a program that you don't know its command-line
options could produce surprising effects, as such the only safe option
that can be used blindly is really --help, which is unambiguous (or -?
now). Keeping -h does not seem useful after those, so I removed them.
It also allows for the _possibility_ of considering reusing -h for
other uses in a pretty distant future, once there's no known dpkg
versions with the old semantics in the wild (JFTR there's still at
least dpkg 1.10.21 used on Fink, released in 2004-04).

Jonathan has already replied to the other inquiries.

thanks,
guillem


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120728175218.GB14357@gaara.hadrons.org">http://lists.debian.org/20120728175218.GB14357@gaara.hadrons.org
 
Old 07-29-2012, 10:29 AM
Neil McGovern
 
Default Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)

On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 07:52:18PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 11:59:07 +0200, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > Right, the delta diff was small enough that I actually put in the time
> > to look at the full diff. This took a number of hours, but anyway:
>
> Well then, thanks for taking the time.
>
> > Some questions:
> > dpkg-1.16.8/dpkg-deb/main.c
> > -" -h|--help Show this help message.
"
> > -" --version Show the version.
"
> > +" -?, --help Show this help message.
"
> > +" --version Show the version.
"
> > Why are you removing -h?
>
> Using -h (or -H) on a program that you don't know its command-line
> options could produce surprising effects, as such the only safe option
> that can be used blindly is really --help, which is unambiguous (or -?
> now). Keeping -h does not seem useful after those, so I removed them.

This really doesn't fit with any of the freeze guidelines, but lots of
the other bits don't either.

> Jonathan has already replied to the other inquiries.

However, unblocked and set to age-days 30. Please note that future
uploads will invalidate this unblock, and I'm hopeful that any future
requests will strictly follow guidelines and introduce the absolute
minimal changes needed.

Neil
--
 
Old 09-04-2012, 04:52 AM
Guillem Jover
 
Default Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)

Hi!

On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 12:29:50 +0200, Neil McGovern wrote:
> However, unblocked and set to age-days 30. Please note that future
> uploads will invalidate this unblock, and I'm hopeful that any future
> requests will strictly follow guidelines and introduce the absolute
> minimal changes needed.

Neil, thanks for taking the time to review the whole thing, and
unblocking it! Much appreciated.

And yeah, now that the misunderstanding from my side got clarified,
I don't expect this to happen again.

thanks,
guillem


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120904045258.GA17596@gaara.hadrons.org">http://lists.debian.org/20120904045258.GA17596@gaara.hadrons.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:59 AM.

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