Source: lintian-brush Version: 0.114 Severity: important X-Debbugs-Cc: codeh...@debian.org
Dear Maintainer, Debian Janitor proposed this change to python-envparse: https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/python-envparse/-/commit/9e543cc28d054301040e211033857f2a5e5d3265 When applied, Salsa CI failed and, thanfully, prevented the modified package being uploaded. The change of ordering triggered a bug in dh-python (filed separately) which caused an error in the maintainer scripts such that the built package not only would not install but also prevented installation of the previous version of that package or any other package. Setting up python3-envparse (0.2.0-3+salsaci) ... dpkg-query: package 'python3-envparse' is not installed Use dpkg --contents (= dpkg-deb --contents) to list archive files contents. Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/py3compile", line 319, in <module> main() File "/usr/bin/py3compile", line 298, in main compile(files, versions, File "/usr/bin/py3compile", line 183, in compile for fn, versions_to_compile in filter_files(files, e_patterns, versions): File "/usr/bin/py3compile", line 128, in filter_files for fpath in files: File "/usr/share/python3/debpython/files.py", line 71, in filter_public for fn in files: File "/usr/share/python3/debpython/files.py", line 53, in from_package raise Exception("cannot get content of %s" % package_name) Exception: cannot get content of python3-envparse:amd64 The problem is that lintian-brush writes out the d.control block using an *arbitary* ordering of fields within the block. Policy states that the ordering of the *blocks* is significant but does not require any specific ordering within the blocks. Convention, however, is that Source is the first line in the first block and Package is the first line of the subsequent blocks. dh-python might not be the only tool in the archive which implements code based on this convention. It looks like lintian-brush is storing the fields of d.control in an unordered type and then writing out the fields without respecting the original order. Right or wrong, this is causing errors elsewhere. The change itself happens as part of the cute-field support to fix the case of field keys. This is a "pedantic" lintian flag, any fix for such a flag must not break any package. Changing the ordering of other fields (like Priority and Section) does not appear to be a problem. However, most packages in the archive are using an ordering that is set by the initial dh-make operation and manual edits of d.control rarely change the ordering of fields. -- System Information: Debian Release: bookworm/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 5.14.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU threads) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB:en Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled
