Re: Git Packaging: Native source formats

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Theodore Y. Ts'o writes ("Re: Git Packaging: Native source formats"):
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:23:01AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I think dgit ought to be compatible with the idea of shipping
> > upstream's .asc's about, but maybe there are bugs.  I don't ever do
> > this so I don't know if it works and I doubt there are tests for it.
> > 
> > So, if you have a package where you want to use dgit push and you find
> > the upstream .asc is not being included, please file bug(s).
> 
> The problem I have is that "dgit gbp" doesn't extract the upstream
> .asc.  Not a big deal, I use /tmp/gbp for my build directory, and I
> manually checkout and populate it with the .asc file.  But building
> from "dgit clone" won't generate same package as I do (which includes
> the .asc file for the orig.tar.gz file.)

When you say

  building from "dgit clone" won't generate same package as I do
  (which includes the .asc file for the orig.tar.gz file.

I'm not an expert on .asc handling but I think what you mean is

  Steps to reproduce

    0. mkdir bpd
    1. dgit --build-products-dir=../bpd clone FOO
    2. cd FOO
    3. dch -i wombat
    4. git commit -a -m changelog
    3. dgit --build-products-dir=../bpd gbp-build

  Expected behaviour

    The generated .changes, and the generated .dsc contain
    FOO_VSN.orig.tar.gz.asc, just as they are in uploads not
    made with dgit.

  Observed behaviour

    The .asc is not mentioned in either the generated .dsc or the
    generated .changes.

?  That would be a bug.  Can you file it and tell me the value of
`FOO' please :-) ?

(I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "doesn't extract the upstream
.asc" since I don't know what it would be "extracted" from.  I tried
to see if I could reproduce for myself, but a quick check through this
subthread didn't turn up the package name.)

Ian.

PS hardcoding directories in /tmp in one's finger macros usually
amounts to embedding tmpfile race vulnerabilities in one's brain.
Even if one's own machine has per-user /tmp, one's wetware becomes
vulnerable when combined with a differently configured computer.  IMO
one should make and use a ~/tmp or something.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.