Bug#513663: [general] need infrastructure to check related packages
Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> writes:
> Speaking of unpacking; as I understand it we once had an "unpack-level
> 2" which has now been removed in favour of collection. I am considering
> to remove the "unpack-level 1" as well and move everything to collection
> as a part of this.
> I feel the unpack code makes the lintian code harder to read and
> understand. If we migrate the last of the unpack stuff to collection I
> think we can reduce the complexity of the "PACKAGE: foreach" loop
> considerably.
As long as we have some way of marking some collections as transient and
some collections to be retained, and then provide some way of overriding
that, that sounds fine. I much prefer talking about everything as
collections. We just need to retain the capability of generating a
Lintian lab for the whole archive without including in the lab all the
unpacked binary and source packages.
> I.e. It took me a while to figure out that the $unpack_level is either
> 1 (if $action is "check" or "unpack") or 0 if $action is "remove" in the
> "PACKAGE: foreach". No other $action reaches that far and the user
> cannot influence $unpack_level (beyond changing $action).
Yeah, there's a lot of code that does stuff like that in frontend/lintian
that will benefit greatly from refactoring into clearer-defined modules.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: