Re: [fis-gtm] "action needed" items
On 03/31/16 16:32, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi Amul,
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:59:59AM -0400, Amul Shah wrote:
Hi Andreas,
On 03/31/16 06:05, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 05:17:52PM -0400, Amul Shah wrote:
FIS released GT.M V6.3-000 yesterday and I am in the process of updating the
Debian package. Since I have the spare cycles, I want to address a few of
the "action needed" items listed on https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tracker.debian.org_pkg_fis-2Dgtm&d=BQIBAg&c=3BfiSO86x5iKjpl2b39jud9R1NrKYqPq2js90dwBswk&r=9ssj4QMqXvXerR0OPzrgsqFDldUsqMEK5X4uhRXsy2Q&m=YORLm8M3Qw3iJc6i6s29cfgJTMmSJHlp8J14aQxl7kU&s=ZMLBgoGBKH0F_wZpBO6OnULXzoS2kBC0WK_m95wC6zM&e=
Thanks for keeping the packages up to date.
[amul:2] After the last round of updates, we instituted a few changes
internally to ensure that we can ship the Debian package ASAP. Can you look
over my recent commit and make any necessary changes? Also, when do can we
push the new version into unstable?
Just uploaded. Will be in unstable after the next mirror sync.
[amul:3] Thanks!
The only thing I'd recommend to test is the following patch:
$ git diff
diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules
index cef9eff..5415aa0 100755
--- a/debian/rules
+++ b/debian/rules
@@ -15,6 +15,8 @@ BINPKG := $(shell awk '/Package:.*[0-9]/{print $$2;}' debian/control)
GTM_INSTALL_DIR := lib/$(MARCH)/fis-gtm/$(UAPIDIR)
LOCAL_GTM_INSTALL_DIR := $(CURDIR)/debian/$(BINPKG)/usr/$(GTM_INSTALL_DIR)
+export DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS = hardening=+all
+
%:
dh $@ --parallel
This should reduce the number of lintian issues about hardening (when
using lintian with info severity).
[amul:3] I will give that a try.
The above files are FIS GT.M database files generated during the build.
These databases hold the online help for FIS GT.M executables. Database
files won't be the same due to time related information in the block
headers. So I need to exclude these files from being checked.
I wonder whether there would be any sensible chance to determine the
time stamp - may be for instance to the time stamp of the changelog.
Does GT.M provide any such functionality?
[amul:2] I don't know of such a functionality. :(
Could you contact upstream about adding such a feature. If I would
design such a system I think this is kind of an essential feature for
instance if you want to design a test suite to be able to rely on a
defined state. BTW, what about creating a test suite that could be run
at build time as well as autopkgtest.
[amul:3] About adding the feature, see below.
[amul:3] FIS has a 15+ year old regression test suite. Migrating parts of it into CTest (usable by autopkgtest) is on my todo list.
I do not think that you can exclude any files from beeing checked. I'd
recommend talking with upstream whether any fixed time setting would be
possible or the reproducible builds team whether they know any way to
create a fake-system-time.
[amul:2] By upstream, do you mean FIS GT.M developers?
Yes, that's the usual Debian slang.
[amul:3] I guess you forgot that I am upstream. :) I should have said that in the last mail. I tried the libfaketime and
datefudgechange for fun but that didn't change reproducibility. I need to look into the DB block level format to figure out if I
can work through this.
Best Regards,
Amul
_____________
The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
Reply to: