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

Bug#655976: marked as done (queue-viewer: support binary debdiffs)

Your message dated Mon, 24 Oct 2016 22:11:51 +0100
with message-id <1477343511.32722.49.camel@adam-barratt.org.uk>
and subject line Re: Bug#655976: queue-viewer: support binary debdiffs
has caused the Debian Bug report #655976,
regarding queue-viewer: support binary debdiffs
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org

655976: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=655976
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: tools

It would be useful if queue-viewer could run debdiff on binary uploads,
in order to catch things like missing or new files and permission
changes.  If anything interesting is found this could then be included
in the queue output.


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 2016-10-21 at 23:35 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-10-15 at 22:53 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > - there's no filtering of "interesting" content; all architectures for
> > which there are packages have a corresponding binary debdiff link
> An initial version of support for this has been deployed.
> Currently, "Version:" fields and package dependency fields where the
> changes consist purely of switching "old source version" for "new source
> version" are automatically removed (with the caveat that only epochless
> versions work).

There's now significantly improved support, including for epochs.

> As well as filtering more "boring" content, we also need some way of
> indicating that no "interesting" differences were found, in a way that
> queue-viewer can detect at runtime.

I've added such a message to affected pages, and made queue-viewer use
that to decide whether to display links to the HTML output.

At this stage I think any further changes can be handled as simple
patches, so I'm closing this bug.



--- End Message ---

Reply to: