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

Bug#644133: marked as done (lintian: dpkg 1.16.1 transition: warns about existing CFLAG in debian/rules)

Your message dated Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:11:17 +0100
with message-id <50F6C315.2050103@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#644133: lintian: dpkg 1.16.1 transition: warns about existing CFLAG in debian/rules
has caused the Debian Bug report #644133,
regarding lintian: dpkg 1.16.1 transition: warns about existing CFLAG in debian/rules
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.)


-- 
644133: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644133
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.3
Severity: wishlist

Some packages used to start debian/rules with things like:
CFLAGS=-Wall -Werror=format-security

However recent dpkg updates[1] not only make these pratices useless, but it
also removes usefull flags such as -fstack-protector in that example.

Lintian should warns about such flags overrides.


[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/09/msg00001.html



-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 3.0.0-1-686-pae (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii  binutils                       2.21.52.20110606-2
ii  bzip2                          1.0.5-7           
ii  diffstat                       1.54-1            
ii  file                           5.08-1            
ii  gettext                        0.18.1.1-4        
ii  intltool-debian                0.35.0+20060710.1 
ii  libapt-pkg-perl                0.1.24+b2         
ii  libclass-accessor-perl         0.34-1            
ii  libdpkg-perl                   1.16.1            
ii  libemail-valid-perl            0.185-1           
ii  libipc-run-perl                0.90-1            
ii  libparse-debianchangelog-perl  1.2.0-1           
ii  libtimedate-perl               1.2000-1          
ii  liburi-perl                    1.59-1            
ii  locales                        2.13-21           
ii  man-db                         2.6.0.2-2         
ii  patchutils                     0.3.2-1           
ii  perl [libdigest-sha-perl]      5.12.4-4          
ii  unzip                          6.0-5             

lintian recommends no packages.

Versions of packages lintian suggests:
ii  binutils-multiarch     <none>               
ii  dpkg-dev               1.16.1               
ii  libhtml-parser-perl    3.68-1+b1            
ii  libtext-template-perl  <none>               
ii  man-db                 2.6.0.2-2            
ii  xz-utils               5.1.1alpha+20110809-2

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Control: tags -1 wontfix

On 2011-10-03 19:17, Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Jean-Michel Vourgère" <jmv_deb@nirgal.com> writes:
> 
>> Some packages used to start debian/rules with things like:
>> CFLAGS=-Wall -Werror=format-security
> 
>> However recent dpkg updates[1] not only make these pratices useless, but it
>> also removes usefull flags such as -fstack-protector in that example.
> 
>> Lintian should warns about such flags overrides.
> 
> Just removing the CFLAGS will mean that no security flags are used at
> all unless one is using dh with compat level 9.
> 
> I'm dubious that this is actually an error; it may be the maintainer
> hard-coding the security flags that the package can actually handle.
> Using dpkg-buildflags is desirable but optional.
> 

Hi,

I am tagging this bug wontfix and at the time closing it to reduce the
number of open bugs.
  If you have any additional information or arguments, do not hesitate
write back and we can re-evaluate the wontfix tag + reopen the bug.

~Niels

--- End Message ---
Reply to: