Re: Summary of current experimental tags
On 2013-04-07 21:22, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> writes:
>> * Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>, 2013-04-07, 17:33:
>
>>> * python(3)-depends-but-no-python(3)-helper 2.5.4 (Nov 2011)
>>> - In total, some 40-46 cases
>>> - both tags are "serious/possible" (E)
>>> - I am considering to promote to "non-experimental".
>
>> I was going to propose to un-experimental this one, too. Unfortunately, a
>> few of these tags are false positive. This is because people do crazy
>> things like this:
>
>> WITH_PYTHON2 = $(shell test -f /usr/bin/dh_python2 && echo "--with python2")
>> %:
>> dh $@ ${WITH_PYTHON2}
>
>> Lintian has of course no way of knowing with will WITH_PYTHON2 expand
>> to... But perhaps in these crazy cases people should just add
>> overrides. (FTR, this is tracked as #659335.)
>
> We could also just assume that anyone using shell substitution variables
> in the dh line of debian/rules know what they're doing. Lintian makes
> similar assumptions elsewhere in rules handling.
>
Promoted and the false-positive fixed just now.
[Jakub Wilk]
> > * package-contains-broken-symlink
> > - nearly 12k tags in < 1000 packages
> > - people seem to symlink the "weirdest" of things.
> > - I am no so certain that maintaining the whitelist we are doing >
> now will remain feasible.
>
> It's probably not.
>
> > - it is normal/possible (W)
>
> Certainty is inflated here; it should be wild-guess.
>
True that, demoted.
> > - I am considering to drop it.
>
> I think we should drop it once #699059 is fixed.
>>> * duplicate-files
>>> - Some 35k tags in < 1000 packages
>>> - a lot of that is caused by doxygen (etc.)
>>> - will possibly be preceived as a lot of busy work by maintainers
>
>> The tag helped me to greatly reduce a binary package size once, but most
>> of the time my reaction to it is "meh, I don't care".
>
> We could make almost all of the Doxygen noise go away by just ignoring
> small files in /usr/share/doc. (The Doxygen noise is indeed really
> annoying.) I kind of like the tag otherwise, but it's definitely
> pedantic, not minor, and is probably pedantic/wild-guess.
>
> [...]
Demoted the severity to pedantic.
Though why do you want the certainty demoted? Given the rarity of
(accidential) md5sums collisons I would say the check is practically
certain (i.e. if the tag is emitted, the files listed are almost
certainly identical).
~Niels
Reply to: