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

Bug#1068324: lintian: patch-not-forwarded-upstream for upstream patches

On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 02:57:28PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >Right. AFAICS, lintian spews that warning because the header in that patch in
> >incomplete. It also needs a "From" and "Subject" (which can be same as commit
> this is not entirely correct.
> The full patch header is:
> Description: fix typeset -p confusion between empty and unset
> Origin: commit:10065BC69BE555D6721
> Description is the standard name for Subject (the same way
> Author is the standard DEP 3 name for From), and it’s present,
> and when Origin indicates an upstream commit (as shown here),
> Author does not need to be present, per DEP 3.

OK, makes sense to me -- thank you!

I dived a little deeper and it seems lintian is checking
whether or not the Origin field's first value before comma is a valid value
(upstream or vendor). However, in your header, you did not specify such a field.
As per dep3, it is optional and hence lintian should not do stringent checks on
this field i.e. assuming that it will have a first paramater of "upsteam, foo"
or "backports, foo".

I've opened an MR https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/merge_requests/499
which is potentially fixing this, and based on local testing
this does not cause regressions, and does not spew that warning/info with your
header as well. However, the fix may still not be proper -- not a perl champ.

I'll leave the review for lintian maintainers.

> bye,
> //mirabilos
> -- 
> If Harry Potter gets a splitting headache in his scar
> when he’s near Tom Riddle (aka Voldemort),
> does Tom get pain in the arse when Harry is near him?
> 	-- me, wondering why it’s not Jerry Potter………

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: