Bug#818687: RFS: btrfs-progs/4.4.1-1.1 [NMU]
On 5 April 2016 at 13:52, Gianfranco Costamagna
<costamagnagianfranco@yahoo.it> wrote:
> so, please remove the moreinfo tag once you have a feedback from -boot team.
Will do. 'hope they rsvp soon!
> also a reverse-dependency needs fixing here
> https://codesearch.debian.net/results/btrfs-tools-udeb/page_0
> partman-btrfs
Fixed. I can't believe I didn't think to check reverse dependencies
when renaming a package...failure of common sense... Do I need to
file a separate RFS for partman-btrfs, for an upload to experimental
when it's work associated with this bug?
http://mentors.debian.net/package/partman-btrfs
Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/partman-btrfs/partman-btrfs_20+nmu1.dsc
> in the meanwhile you should consider fixing lintian complaints
> http://debomatic-amd64.debian.net/distribution#experimental/btrfs-progs/4.4.1-1.1/lintian
btrfs-progs source: dbg-package-missing-depends btrfs-tools-dbg
* because btrfs-tools-dbg depends on btrfs-progs-dbg which depends
on btrfs-progs (=
N: ${binary:Version}), the dependencies are already satisfied, no?
Or is lintian not following the dependency tree to a sufficient depth?
btrfs-progs source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature
* I can't find a gpg signature, but there is a sha256sum
< https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/kdave/btrfs-progs/sha256sums.asc
>
btrfs-progs: malformed-override Possibly wrong package in override at
line 3 (got btrfs-tools, expected btrfs-progs)
* fixed
btrfs-progs: spelling-error-in-binaries and manpages
* I'm sure I read on the btrfs mailing list that these were fixed in
a later version. Of course, I'm willing to patch 4.4.1 if necessary.
btrfs-progs: hardening-no-pie bin/btrfs
Severity: normal, Certainty: wild-guess
* I'm not sure about this one, but I given how often it is said on
the vger mailing list that btrfs is young and is changing quickly, but
I suspect that it's not yet time for this. What do you think?
btrfs-progs: no-upstream-changelog
* Maintained on the upstream btrfs wiki rather than a text file.
btrfs-progs: command-with-path-in-maintainer-script postinst:7
/usr/sbin/update-initramfs
* fixed.
btrfs-progs: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink
usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libbtrfs.so.0.1
usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libbtrfs.so
*** I think this needs an override, please confim. ***
btrfs-progs: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libbtrfs.so.0.1
* Is this worthwhile when only partman-btrfs depends on this?
Oh, and I found out why I used an old standards version in an earlier
package...I'm still developing on Jessie and then using cowbuilder to
build sid packages. Yeah, a proper development environment (perhaps a
VM?) is needed and will soon be installed. If you have any
suggestions, or know of any articles, please share!
The updated btrfs-progs is in the same location on mentors. I didn't
bump the NMU revision because it seems that my last package isn't in
the archive anymore.
Cheers,
Nicholas
Reply to: