Re: [SCM] Debian package checker branch, master, updated. 38002a14d5e0b494449410efb1d8555ead1cef30

[Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>]

"Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> writes:

>> -	    if (not $obsoleteconfmodule and
>> +	    if (($file eq 'postinst' or $file eq 'config') and
>> +		not $obsoleteconfmodule and
>>  	        m,(/usr/share/debconf/confmodule\.sh|
>>  	           Debian::DebConf::Client::ConfModule),x) {
>>  	        tag "$file-loads-obsolete-confmodule", "$1";

> This could be easily fixed by renaming the postinst variant to
> maintainer-script-loads-obsolete-confmodule - or just
> loads-obsolete-confmodule. Does renaming tags cause any major issues?
> (other than invalidating any overrides for the tag).

Nope.  And that's what I'd do there as well.

>> -	unless ($usesconfmodule) {
>> -	    tag "$file-does-not-load-confmodule", ""
>> -		unless ($type eq 'udeb' || ($file eq 'postinst' && !$seenconfig));
>> +	if ($file eq 'postinst' or $file eq 'config') {
>> +	    unless ($usesconfmodule) {
>> +		tag "$file-does-not-load-confmodule", ""
>> +		    unless ($type eq 'udeb' || ($file eq 'postinst' && !$seenconfig));
>
> This one would be slightly more complicated as it requires determining
> whether the {pre,post}rm and preinst scripts use debconf.

Agreed.  It would be nice, but isn't particularly critical.

> It also has the potential to require
> yet-another-does-not-load-confmodule tag, unless we renamed the postinst
> tag to be more generic; there is a fair amount of postinst-specific
> information in its description currently.

I think that the check for other scripts is fundamentally different than
the one for config and postinst.  The last two have special requirements
that are part of how debconf works, whereas the other scripts just need to
load it if they use it.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>