Bug#854456: unblock: debdelta/0.59

[Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>]

Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed

A Mennucc:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
> 
> Please unblock package debdelta
> 
> Dear release team, the version 0.56 of debdelta in testing suffers of
> many bugs, and in particular #852087 that is release-critical
> 
> In 07 Jan I had prepared debdelta 0.57 to the archives, but it was not
> accepted (I suspect that "debsign" chose the wrong key :-(  )
> 
> I have now uploaded 0.58exp in experimental;
> and I have prepared 0.59 to upload into testing,
> but I need advice, if it may be accepted or not.
> 
> Here is a streamlined changelog, to help you read the attached debdiff
> 
>  [...]
> 
> Note that, when solving bug 779897 , I added new features, and these
> are documented and then translated in the PT and IT translations.
> 
> I remark that I did not yet upload 0.59 to unstable.
> 
> Thanks again for any help. A.
> 
> unblock debdelta/0.59
> 
> [...]

I am considering to grant an exception.  I do have a few minor remarks
in my review:


in debdelta:
> +        #check if delta failed upstream
> +        if uri[:7] == 'http://' and not proxies and 200 ==  test_uri(uri+'-fails'): # FIXME support ftp or proxies
> +          print _('Delta missing, server failed to create it:')+' '+uri
> +          if 'f' in DEB_POLICY:
>              no_delta.append( (deb_uri, newdeb) )
>            elif VERBOSE > 1 : print '  No deb-policy "u", no download of ',deb_uri

Inconsistent: Checks for "f" in DEB_POLICY, but warns about "u".


> +        if DEBUG and VERBOSE:
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Should this have been an "or"?  (either way is fine, it just looked weird).

> +          print _('Delta is not present:')+' '+uri
> +        else:
> +          print _('Delta is not present:')+' '+delta_name
> +


in d/rules:
> +	for L in $(LANGS) ; do install -d $(D)/usr/share/locale/$${L}/LC_MESSAGES ; done
> [...]
> 
> +	for L in $(LANGS) ; do 	cp po/$${L}.mo $(D)/usr/share/locale/$${L}/LC_MESSAGES/debdelta.mo ; done

Both of these for loops need a "set -e;" in front of them to ensure
"fails on error".  As in:

"""
	set -e ; for L in $(LANGS) ; do ... ; done
"""

Feel free to upload to unstable fixing at least the d/rules remark.

Thanks,
~Niels