Bug#782180: unblock pre-approval: apt-zip/0.18+nmu1
On 2015-04-10 02:22, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Niels Thykier wrote:
>> If you are interested in keeping apt-zip in Jessie, then please include
>> a fix for #718376 (I promoted it to grave) and also (have the
>> maintainers) commit to maintaining it for Jessie as well.
>
> JFTR: I've had a closer look at #718376 and now that I understand the
> control flow, I must say that this bug report doesn't look RC to me
> anymore. "This package contains some code to verify .deb files
> in the wget method, but it only handles data.tar.gz deb members, it's
> at least missing support" sounds scary, yes, but isn't:
>
> [...]
>
> So IMHO this neither compromises integrity (if that code is run,
> hashsum based integrity checks already have been skipped) nor does it
> abort the script (archive format consistency checks are just skipped
> in case of unknown formats). I'd say either "normal", or "important"
> at most, as it doesn't really cause a "_major_ effect on the usability
> of a package, without rendering it completely unusable to everyone".
>
Ok, thanks for the analysis. I have downgraded the bug again. Though,
my request for commitment still stands.
> I can also say that Guillem's untested patch looks good except that it
> misses the ";;" inside the case statement.
>
Ack, please follow up to the bug in case you have not already.
> But I've found another issue while faking a missing md5sum command:
>
> I've tried to fake that by using '[ "`type xmd5sum`" ]' instead of '[
> "`type md5sum`" ]', but unfortunately that test still returns true and
> goes down the md5sum road -- at least in dash (and zsh, but not in
> bash).
>
> I'm though not yet sure where exactly the bashism is hidden nor what
> impact it has when not trying to fake a missing md5sum while md5sum
> actually is still there.
>
$ bash -c 'type la 2>/dev/null'
$ dash -c 'type la 2>/dev/null'
la: not found
$
> Will write a separate bug report for the latter issue, probably when
> I've got a proper fix for it.
>
> Regards, Axel
>
Thanks,
~Niels
Reply to: