On 24 November 2014 at 05:08, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Thanks for your clarification. Is the attached patch OK ?
That looks good to me.
--
Brian May
Le Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 04:14:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> >
> > Then they are not empty: there is a big difference between "Depends:" and
> > "Depends: ${foo}". I think that it would be very confusing if we would
> > refer
> >
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , 2014-11-23, 18:49:
> >>This bug is mostly to document a check in dak. Are you
> >>suggesting the check is looking at the debian/control file and
> >>reject source packages with empty fields?
> >
> >That would be broken beyond
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 01:25:50PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 01:58:41AM +, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 12:39:44PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 04:31:52PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > > Lintian has a tag:
> >
* Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , 2014-11-23, 18:49:
This bug is mostly to document a check in dak. Are you suggesting the
check is looking at the debian/control file and reject source packages
with empty fields?
That would be broken beyond belief! debian/control might not even
*exist* after s
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 02:15:45AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Le Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 03:08:47PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a
> > écrit :
> > > On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > > > do you have examples of packages having empt
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 08:15:33PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 23/11/14 at 20:03 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 04:47:00PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > > --- a/policy.sgml
> > > > +++ b/policy.sgml
>
On 23/11/14 at 20:03 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 04:47:00PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > --- a/policy.sgml
> > > +++ b/policy.sgml
> > > @@ -1928,12 +1928,16 @@ zope.
> > > impossible to auto-compile th
Bill Allombert (2014-11-23):
> > This is something we want for multiple reasons, but have we already fixed
> > all instances of, e.g., validating sgml/xml parsers trying to fetch DTDs or
> > schemas during documentation build ? Or other network access attempts that
> > don't fail a build (and hel
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 02:15:45AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 03:08:47PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit
> :
> > On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > >
> > > do you have examples of packages having empty fields in source package
> > > control
> >
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 04:47:00PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > --- a/policy.sgml
> > +++ b/policy.sgml
> > @@ -1928,12 +1928,16 @@ zope.
> > impossible to auto-compile that package and also makes it hard
> > for other people
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:52:54PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 09:24:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > > 2.2.1 says "the packages in main
> > >
> > >must not require or recommend a package outside of main for
> > > compilation or
> > > execution (thus, the p
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -1928,12 +1928,16 @@ zope.
> impossible to auto-compile that package and also makes it hard
> for other people to reproduce the same binary package, all
> required targets must be non-int
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 03:08:47PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit
> :
> > On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > >
> > > do you have examples of packages having empty fields in source package
> > > control
> > > files ? I have not
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 05:45:37PM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On 23/11/14 17:19, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 02:38:39PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> >> We need two virtual package names, one for Python2 and one for Python3.
> >
> > What I am unclear is why a single virtual p
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 05:38:50PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Package: debian-policy
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > 2.2.1 says "the packages in main
> >
> >must not require or recommend a package outside of main for compilation
> > or
> > execution (thus, the package must not declare a
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 09:24:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > 2.2.1 says "the packages in main
> >
> >must not require or recommend a package outside of main for compilation
> > or
> > execution (thus, the package must not declare a "Pre-Depends", "Depends",
> > "Recommends", "Build-Dep
On 23/11/14 17:19, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 02:38:39PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
>> We need two virtual package names, one for Python2 and one for Python3.
>
> What I am unclear is why a single virtual package httpd-wsgi3 will work
> for python 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 etc.
All versions
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 02:38:39PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Severity: normal
>
> The httpd-wsgi virtual name was added in response to #588497.
>
> However, as per the following email:
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/09/msg00719.html
>
> "WSGI is an API,
Le Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 03:08:47PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> >
> > do you have examples of packages having empty fields in source package
> > control
> > files ? I have not found any. (In the sense that a field that only
> > con
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 08:15:03AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit
> :
> > Empty fields in debian/control must be valid in *source* packages. It is a
> > widely used feature of the dpkg-dev suite, and it has been around for a very
> > very l
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Anyway, this is a second try.
>
> Cheers,
> commit d450ce8f978bad0f3927ea055698b789055dfa3a
> Author: Bill Allombert
> Date: Sun Nov 23 16:16:21 2014 +0100
>
> Document that empty field values are only allowed in debian/control.
>
> diff --git
Le Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 08:15:03AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a écrit :
>
> Empty fields in debian/control must be valid in *source* packages. It is a
> widely used feature of the dpkg-dev suite, and it has been around for a very
> very long time AFAIK.
Hi Henrique,
do you have examples
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 03:03:07PM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Severity: wishlist
>
> 2.2.1 says "the packages in main
>
>must not require or recommend a package outside of main for compilation or
> execution (thus, the package must not declare a "Pre-Depends",
* Andrey Rahmatullin , 2014-11-23, 18:38:
Ref: policy 3.4.2
Lintian should probably refer to DevRef§6.2.3 instead.
Basing an E tag on just DevRef sounds strange.
The tag (description-synopsis-is-duplicated) currently has:
Severity: important
Certainty: certain
Certainty is about right, bu
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 01:46:10PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> > index 6eac491..66de529 100644
> > --- a/policy.sgml
> > +++ b/policy.sgml
> > @@ -2556,13 +2556,15 @@ endif
> >
> > Packag
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 09:21:02PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Peter Eisentraut , 2008-01-06, 14:55:
> >I think that installing a source-level change list is hardly ever
> >useful for a binary package.
>
> It's normally more useful that no changelog at all. :-)
>
> What I tend to do in my packag
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Andrey Rahmatullin , 2014-11-22, 12:39:
> >--- a/policy.sgml
> >+++ b/policy.sgml
> >@@ -8892,6 +8892,7 @@ fname () {
> > would point to /srv/run rather than the intended
> > target.
> >
> >+ Symbolic links must not tra
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Bill Allombert wrote:
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 6eac491..66de529 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -2556,13 +2556,15 @@ endif
>
> Package: libc6
>
> the field name is Package and the field value
> libc6
* Andrey Rahmatullin , 2014-11-22, 12:39:
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -8892,6 +8892,7 @@ fname () {
would point to /srv/run rather than the intended
target.
+ Symbolic links must not traverse above the root directory.
Seconded.
--
Jaku
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 08:15:03AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Le Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 10:56:15AM +0100, Bill Allombert a écrit :
> > > What about automatically generated control files and substvar ?
> > > e.g.
> > > Depends: ${misc:Dep
> From: Charles Plessy
> Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 11:16:50 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] Disallow empty fields in control files, as apt and dak
> reject them already.
>
> Closes: 666726
> ---
> policy.sgml |8
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/policy.sgml
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 06:16:19PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> >The current practice is to not repeat the synopsis and this is enforced by
> >lintian since 2002, with an E tag:
> [...]
> > Ref: policy 3.4.2
>
> Lintian should probably refer to DevRef§6.2.3 instead.
Basing an E tag on just DevRef
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 01:58:41AM +, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 12:39:44PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 04:31:52PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > Lintian has a tag:
> > > Tag: symlink-has-too-many-up-segments
> > > Severity: serious
>
> >
34 matches
Mail list logo
