On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 09:51 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Fri, 16 May 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > I totally agree that we need to make our changes more visible. In the > > openssl case, the patch in question is inside the .diff.gz and you don't > > notice it in the unpacked source package. I tend to give a look to what's > > in debian/patches/ when I rebuild a package but not to what's in .diff.gz > > only. > > If I inspect an unknown package I always do > > zgrep "^+++ " *.diff.gz | grep -v "/debian/" > > and I wonder whether I should file a bug report against "dpkg-source -x" > to do this by default. lintian already has that level of check but it does have problems with generated files, see #471263: "Files that are changed as the result of a patch to a file that is processed during the build should be ignored - e.g. patching configure.in|ac should mean that changes in ./configure must be ignored." Otherwise, as soon as autotools updates or an m4 macro gets updated in some -dev package, the "patch" for ./configure will break for no good reason and we get a FTBFS RC bug. Detecting which files are changed as a by-product of a patch isn't always particularly obvious. Incidentally, you can collapse the zgrep into lsdiff -z: $ lsdiff -z *.diff.gz | grep -v debian -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part