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

Bug#423223: marked as done (lintian: Please add directory name sanity check for orig.tar.gz)

Your message dated Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:41:54 -0800
with message-id <87iqomxxm5.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
and subject line Re: Bug#423223: lintian: Please add directory name sanity check for orig.tar.gz
has caused the Debian Bug report #423223,
regarding lintian: Please add directory name sanity check for orig.tar.gz
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
423223: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=423223
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: lintian
Severity: wishlist

Hi Lintian maintainers,

Would it be possible to add a severity "warning" check on the
orig.tar.gz or tar.gz to make sure that the directory inside the tarball
has a sane name?  Specifically it should be named with one of the forms

<sourcepkg>-<upstream_version>
<sourcepkg>-<upstream_version>.orig
[latter is probably not OK for Debian-specific tar.gz]

where <upstream_version> is the version given in the most recent
debian/changelog entry, with the epoch and Debian release stripped.

The convention is documented as a "should" in Developers' Reference 6.7.8.

This check would have saved me from #416008 ;-)

best regards,

-- 
Kevin B. McCarty <kmccarty@princeton.edu>   Physics Department
WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/    Princeton University
GPG: public key ID 4F83C751                 Princeton, NJ 08544

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <he@ftwca.de> writes:
> "Kevin B. McCarty" <kmccarty@Princeton.EDU> writes:

>>>> This check would have saved me from #416008 ;-)

>>> That's not really a bug.  That's not a supported way of unpacking a
>>> Debian package.  Debian packages should be unpacked with dpkg-source
>>> or with a program that performs the same operations.  Since you're
>>> repackaging the upstream source anyway, you can certainly fix it if
>>> you so choose, but there's no need to do so.

>> OK, thank you for the clarification.  I've been redoing the orig.tar.gz
>> files for the affected packages even if it isn't a real bug, just to
>> make things "cleaner".

> As this really isn't somethint that is needed, I'm tagging this bug as
> wontfix.

We have another open bug (#471537) for checking repackaged .orig.tar.gz
files, so I think the remaining part of this bug is now redundant.  I'm
going to go ahead and close this one.

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

--- End Message ---
Reply to: