-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Paul,
On 02.08.2011 23:34, Paul Wise wrote:
> Which version of lintian does it use? It would be nice if it were
> pinned to sid or backports. I guess it doesn't process the binary
> packages?
Currently it uses 2.5.1 from Sid. Asheesh installed tha
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
> A quick, much-delayed follow-up to this thread: expo.debian.net shows
> lintian output on the web now.
Which version of lintian does it use? It would be nice if it were
pinned to sid or backports. I guess it doesn't process the binary
packag
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Paul Wise wrote:
It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it to
in order to encourage accuracy and for people
* Arno Töll , 2011-07-09, 11:13:
Automatically running code from random people sounds rather risky to me.
...
And now you're even giving them root rights! I suppose this is out of
the question.
Well, this is not necessarily a problem. There are enough possibilities
to come over this problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Sven,
On 09.07.2011 10:36, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2011-07-09 10:20 +0200, Reijo Tomperi wrote:
> Automatically running code from random people sounds rather risky to me.
...
> And now you're even giving them root rights! I suppose this is out of
Sven Joachim wrote:
And now you're even giving them root rights! I suppose this is out of
the question.
Is it impossible to setup a sandbox where this is done? Isolate it from
everything, except from some trivial output mechanism which will give
the results back to service.
--
Reijo
--
On 2011-07-09 10:20 +0200, Reijo Tomperi wrote:
> We could have a service where we submit the package. That service will
> then run some checks for it. E.g.
> - building the package
Automatically running code from random people sounds rather risky to me.
> - lintian check.
> - install & uninstal
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
We do have part of the upload on m.d.n, I have a hunch it'd be fairly
simple to actually run Lintian on it, and report the status of the
package.
I second this.
We could have a service where we submit the package. That service will
then run some checks for it. E.g.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 11:32:20 +0200
"Thomas Preud'homme" wrote:
> Le vendredi 8 juillet 2011 11:13:53, Arno Töll a écrit :
> > Hi Karl,
> >
> > On 08.07.2011 05:49, Karl Goetz wrote:
> > >> - The -I and --pedantic options should always be used.
> > >
> > > Why is that? the manual entry for --pe
Le vendredi 8 juillet 2011 11:13:53, Arno Töll a écrit :
> Hi Karl,
>
> On 08.07.2011 05:49, Karl Goetz wrote:
> >> - The -I and --pedantic options should always be used.
> >
> > Why is that? the manual entry for --pedantic says
> >
> >> Pedantic tags are Lintian at its most pick
Le Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 11:13:53AM +0200, Arno Töll a écrit :
>
> That said, some pedantic tags can probably be ignored but most are
> nonetheless still a very helpful addition one better should consider
> when packaging software.
Hello everybody,
I would like to add that in my experience, an in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Karl,
On 08.07.2011 05:49, Karl Goetz wrote:
>> - The -I and --pedantic options should always be used.
>
> Why is that? the manual entry for --pedantic says
>> Pedantic tags are Lintian at its most pickiest and
>> include checks fo
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 07:27:21 +0200
Kilian Krause wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 11:04:49PM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Kilian Krause
> > wrote:
> > > Does anyone know the current status of the new mentors.d.n?
> >
> > Hasn't seen many commits rec
Paul Wise writes:
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean.
Thanks for raising this topic for discussion.
> If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it to in
> order
Hi Paul,
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 11:04:49PM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Kilian Krause wrote:
>
> > Until that happens though I've put together a somewhat lenghty test-script
> > that I usually run on my resulting packages after they are built as a review
> > proces
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 22:47:24 +0200
Paul Wise wrote:
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accu
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 23:05:03 +0200
Benoît Knecht wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Paul Wise wrote:
> > It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be
> > lintian clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually
> > be lintian clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could
>
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:47:24PM +0200, Paul Wise a écrit :
>> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
>> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
>> clean. If we were to change the
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 00:35:51 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
On 2011-07-08 00:34, Rodolfo kix Garcia wrote:
One idea about how to check the packages is add the check in the the
.dupload.conf file.
Not sure about dupload, but dput has a --lintian option. :)
Example:
$preupload{'deb'} = 'lintia
Le Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:47:24PM +0200, Paul Wise a écrit :
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encou
On 2011-07-08 00:34, Rodolfo kix Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 23:05:03 +0200, Benoît Knecht wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> Paul Wise wrote:
>>> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
>>> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
>>> clean. I
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 23:05:03 +0200, Benoît Knecht wrote:
Hi Paul,
Paul Wise wrote:
It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be
lintian
clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change
it
t
On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 23:36:21 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> A little heads up; in lintian 2.5.1 and newer you can enable default
> settings for some options in your lintianrc (e.g. ~/.lintianrc):
Wow, that's cool -- thanks!
Cheers,
gregor
--
.''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - P
On 2011-07-07 23:05, Benoît Knecht wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Paul Wise wrote:
>> [...]
>
> I think three things are currently unclear:
>
> - lintian should be run on the .changes file before uploading a
> package to mentors, in order to check both the source and binary
> package (I know I
Hi Paul,
Paul Wise wrote:
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to act
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Kilian Krause wrote:
> Until that happens though I've put together a somewhat lenghty test-script
> that I usually run on my resulting packages after they are built as a review
> process. And if that fails, I'll report it back to the list like anyone
> else. Would
Paul,
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:47:24PM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to e
Hi all,
I think the main problem is the default level of warning/error for lintian.
Even for my first package I ran lintian but my package seems to be lintian
clean !!
Now I run lintian with theses parameters : lintian -IivEcm --pedantic
*.changes
It's a but strict but help me find problem.
Rega
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accurac
29 matches
Mail list logo
