This is a reply to a message from last May that I'd set aside at the time
because I wanted to think about it, and then it got buried in my to-do
list for all this time. Sorry about that. I've been thinking about it
off and on since then, at least.
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> This tension is c
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 05:46:18PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> I'm not Russ, obviously, but fwiw with my Lintian co-maintainer hat
> on...
Thanks to both Adam and Russ for the clear answers.
> My initial thought is that doing so would break reproducibility of
> Lintian results. Maintaining th
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> That, to me, looks like *a* possible way of implementing that. Before
> going forward however, I'd like to have Lintian's maintainer approval
> on the strategy. What we are proposing is a conditional lintian check,
> to be implemented in Perl as usual, but relying on
Zack wrote:
[ replying to Russ' post, which contains the interesting part to
support Stephane's reply ]
I'm not Russ, obviously, but fwiw with my Lintian co-maintainer hat on...
In this particular case it will be /usr/bin/ocamlobjinfo. The lintian
test will do nothing, silently, if the exec
[ replying to Russ' post, which contains the interesting part to
support Stephane's reply ]
On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 10:02:27AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > ... but I doubt that we can rely on external packages from lintian
> > checks (lintian maintainers: can we?). So I suggest implementing th
Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
>> This check is quite easy using the ocamlobjinfo tool: it prints "Force
>> custom: YES" when given a faulty .cma.
>
> ... but I doubt that we can rely on external packages from lintian
> checks (lintian maintainers: can we?). So I suggest implementing the
> test in p
Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 04:51:07PM +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
>> This check is quite easy using the ocamlobjinfo tool: it prints "Force
>> custom: YES" when given a faulty .cma.
> ... but I doubt that we can rely on external packages from lintia
On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 04:51:07PM +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> This check is quite easy using the ocamlobjinfo tool: it prints "Force
> custom: YES" when given a faulty .cma.
... but I doubt that we can rely on external packages from lintian
checks (lintian maintainers: can we?). So I suggest
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> As such, we would like to add a lintian check to warn against OCaml
> custom mode executable. They can easily detected by looking for a magic
> number at the end of the file, as described in the forwarded mail from
> upstream.
Libraries can force custom mode executables
9 matches
Mail list logo
