On 2024-10-27 7 h 16 p.m., Richard Lewis wrote:
"Serafeim (Serafi) Zanikolas" <s...@debian.org> writes:
hi lintian and piuparts folks! relatively new maintainer of adequate(1) here.
No-one replied so i thought i'd have a go, but i have no role in any of
this, just a user who has also tried to understand these tools
it seems to me that it'd be useful to write down some criteria to use as
guidance on how to decide where new checks should be implemented, to avoid
duplication.
source-package checks clearly belong in lintian. binary-package checks are
trickier:
- lintian is great to check requirements around mechanics (e.g. that a certain
helper is used appropriately, rather than using ad-hoc code)
i'd think:
lintian is static analysis, it doesnt install the deb, just looks at
its contents vs policy
piuparts is mostly about upgrades and removals -- and interactions
with other debs
this leaves adequate as "things lintian cant do as it would need the
deb to be installed" but which dont relate to upgrades/removals
(perhaps adequate and the "i" bit of piuparts could be merged, but
maybe the difference is that adequate only looks at once package? and
not sure anyone maintains piuparts any more?)
Hi,
Thanks for reaching out.
I can't really speak for piuparts, but I agree with what Serafeim wrote
for the lintian part.
One of the strengths of lintian and piuparts is a lot of people run them
each time they build a package. Adequate needing the package to be
installed makes it harder to integrate in that workflow.
Maybe if it was a feature in sbuild it would help?
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ po...@debian.org / veronneau.org
⠈⠳⣄
