Re: Bug#963524: debian-policy: Binary and Description fields not mandatory in .changes on source-only uploads
Control: reassign -1 debian-policy
Control: retitle -1 debian-policy: Binary and Description fields not mandatory in .changes on source-only uploads
On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 18:51:21 -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Package: dpkg
> Severity: normal
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-lint-maint@lists.debian.org
> Starting with an upcoming release, Lintian will check for the presence
> of required and recommended fields in various packaging control files.
> Our methods are probably not perfect, but it was brought to my
> attention that 'dpkg-buildpackage -S' produces *.changes files without
> 'Binary' and 'Description' fields.
This is due to a fix in dpkg 1.19.3 prompted by #818618, which brought up
an inconsistency in the handling of these fields
(commit 4a4619831de8b8972f86b489660dc98f187cfa34 in dpkg.git). DAK got
also fixed to accept these .changes files.
> Policy 5.5 states that both fields are mandatory. [1]
>
> [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#debian-changes-files-changes
>
> You may be able to find details about an example (by building Lintian)
> at the link below.
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/commit/54a3c2437eadb0684f6762a81a82163f36562d3e#note_176583
>
> Please note that I filed this bug with normal severity, even though as
> a policy violation, it should be serious. I did so because I believe
> the policy is at least partially in error (with respect to the
> 'Binary' field).
The deb-changes(5) and policy state that these fields contain
information for binary packages being uploaded. On a source-only upload,
there are no such binaries, so the definition was internally inconsistent.
I think the only thing missing is policy clarifying that this field is only
mandatory on non-source-only uploads.
Regards,
Guillem
Reply to: