Re: .changes files as first-class objects
"Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> writes:
> As a recent post reminded me that I hadn't done so yet, I've rebased the
> changes against current master and uploaded a new version to the URL
> above.
> The new version includes the changes we discussed back in January,
> together with the security-relevant fixes I could see and a couple of
> other issues I spotted at the same time; please yell if I missed
> anything, particularly on the security front.
This generally looks great. Some minor things (abbreviated to just
relevant context):
--- a/t/tests/distribution-multiple-bad/tags
+++ b/t/tests/distribution-multiple-bad/tags
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-E: distribution-multiple-bad_1.0_arch.changes:
+E: distribution-multiple-bad_1.0_amd64 changes:
The formatting change broke the post-tag munging to replace the local
architecture with "arch".
--- a/t/tests/generic-empty/tags
+++ b/t/tests/generic-empty/tags
@@ -5,9 +5,9 @@ E: generic-empty source: no-standards-version-field
E: generic-empty: maintainer-address-missing a
E: generic-empty: no-copyright-file
E: generic-empty: package-has-no-description
-E: generic-empty_1.0_arch.changes: bad-urgency-in-changes-file unknown
-E: generic-empty_1.0_arch.changes: changed-by-address-malformed a <>
-E: generic-empty_1.0_arch.changes: changed-by-address-missing a <>
+E: generic-empty_1.0_amd64 changes: bad-urgency-in-changes-file unknown
+E: generic-empty_1.0_amd64 changes: changed-by-address-malformed a <>
+E: generic-empty_1.0_amd64 changes: changed-by-address-missing a <>
W: generic-empty source: changelog-should-mention-nmu
W: generic-empty source: maintainer-not-full-name a
W: generic-empty source: no-section-field-for-source
Same thing here.
--- a/testset/tags.foo++
+++ b/testset/tags.foo++
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
-E: foo++_arch.changes:
+E: foo++_5_amd64 changes:
and here.
--- a/testset/tags.scripts
+++ b/testset/tags.scripts
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
-E: scripts_6ds-1ubuntu0.5.10.1_arch.changes:
+E: scripts_6ds-1ubuntu0.5.10.1_amd64 changes:
and here.
With those fixes, I think it's ready to commit.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: