[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mass-filling against packages without MD5-sums? (was: debsums for maintainer scripts)

* Gergely Nagy (algernon@bonehunter.rulez.org) [031201 23:10]:
> > * Michael Ablassmeier (abi@grinser.de) [031201 19:55]:
> > > I think, at least Packages like "dpkg" or "gnupg" should call
> > > "dh_md5sums". I was wondering, if it would be usefull to make
> > > a mass bug-filling against these Packages. Before, it would be
> > > nice to have a List of Packages (maybe sorted by Maintainer)
> > > which do not call "dh_md5sums".
> > > 
> > > IMHO Lintian should also check if "dh_md5sums" is called and
> > > print at least a warning if this is not the case.

> > I agree with you, and I would support mass-filling, if first such a
> > list has been published here on d-d, together with the warning of
> > mass-filling.
> I disagree. Filing bugs on packages not having md5sums _might_ be ok,
> altough last time I checked, md5sums were only sugested, nowhere near
> a must in policy. Filing bugs based on missing calls to dh_md5sums is
> simply stupid. You don't need to build-depend on debhelper to have
> md5sums.

It was understood (at least from my side) that the checks should
actually be performed on the debs, and just for the existence of
md5sums, and of course not on the way of creating them. Everyone is
free to use the build tool he himself likes most. Sorry if I was
unclear about that.

   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Reply to: