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

Bug#1106532: unblock: devscripts/2.25.13



Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
X-Debbugs-Cc: devscripts@packages.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:devscripts

Please unblock package devscripts for some rather trivial changes:

devscripts (2.25.13) unstable; urgency=medium

  [ Andreas Tille ]
  * debcommit: Prefer Git over SVN or CVS. Closes: #1106159

  [ Jochen Sprickerhof ]
  * scripts/devscripts/proxy.py: ignore zero size files in cache.

  [ Holger Levsen ]
  * mass-bug: fix typo in manpage, thanks to Julien Plissonneau Duquène.
  * Update French translation, thanks to Julien Plissonneau Duquène/MR503.
  * Update Portuguese translation, thanks to Américo Monteiro.
    Closes: #1105959
  * Update po4a.

 -- Holger Levsen <holger@debian.org>  Thu, 22 May 2025 16:16:30 +0200

*However*, the debdiff to the version in testing is:

$ debdiff devscripts_2.25.12.dsc devscripts_2.25.13.dsc | diffstat
 debian/changelog                              |   17 
 po4a/add_fr/translator_dbk.add                |    7 
 po4a/add_fr/translator_man.add                |   13 
 po4a/add_fr/translator_pod.add                |    2 
 po4a/po/de.po                                 |  842 +++++-----
 po4a/po/devscripts.pot                        |    4 
 po4a/po/fr.po                                 | 6072 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------------
 po4a/po/pt.po                                 |  936 +++++------
 scripts/build/lib/devscripts/__init__.py      |    1 
 scripts/build/lib/devscripts/control.py       |  307 ---
 scripts/build/lib/devscripts/logger.py        |   75 
 scripts/build/lib/devscripts/proxy.py         |  232 --
 scripts/build/scripts-3.11/deb-janitor        |  320 ---
 scripts/build/scripts-3.11/debbisect          | 1093 -------------
 scripts/build/scripts-3.11/debdiff-apply      |  382 ----
 scripts/build/scripts-3.11/debootsnap         |  597 -------
 scripts/build/scripts-3.11/reproducible-check |  266 ---
 scripts/build/scripts-3.11/sadt               |  647 -------
 scripts/build/scripts-3.11/suspicious-source  |  177 --
 scripts/build/scripts-3.11/wrap-and-sort      |  514 ------
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/deb-janitor        |  322 ---
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/debbisect          | 1093 -------------
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/debdiff-apply      |  382 ----
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/debftbfs           |  389 ----
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/debootsnap         |  638 -------
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/reproducible-check |  266 ---
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/sadt               |  647 -------
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/suspicious-source  |  177 --
 scripts/build/scripts-3.12/wrap-and-sort      |  514 ------
 scripts/debcommit.pl                          |    8 
 scripts/devscripts/proxy.py                   |    2 
 scripts/mass-bug.pl                           |    2 
 32 files changed, 3936 insertions(+), 13008 deletions(-)

while neither scripts/build/scripts-3.1(1|2) should exist in the source package.

So I've checked all *my* devscripts uploads to unstable (going back to
2.24.2 uploaded 2024-10-31) and the all included scripts/build/scripts-3.1*,
and 2.24.1 uploaded before also had that.
So I checked the version in stable, and that doesn't have scripts/build/scripts-3.1*.

AFAIK there's also no impact on the binary packages, as the debdiff
between the binary devscripts package in testing and unstable is this:
(run on the actually binaries from ftp.d.o)

$ debdiff devscripts_2.25.12_all.deb devscripts_2.25.13_all.deb
[The following lists of changes regard files as different if they have
different names, permissions or owners.]

Files in second .deb but not in first
-------------------------------------
-rw-r--r--  root/root   /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/devscripts-2.25.13.egg-info/PKG-INFO
-rw-r--r--  root/root   /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/devscripts-2.25.13.egg-info/dependency_links.txt
-rw-r--r--  root/root   /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/devscripts-2.25.13.egg-info/top_level.txt

Files in first .deb but not in second
-------------------------------------
-rw-r--r--  root/root   /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/devscripts-2.25.12.egg-info/PKG-INFO
-rw-r--r--  root/root   /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/devscripts-2.25.12.egg-info/dependency_links.txt
-rw-r--r--  root/root   /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/devscripts-2.25.12.egg-info/top_level.txt

Control files: lines which differ (wdiff format)
------------------------------------------------
Installed-Size: [-2697-] {+2700+}
Version: [-2.25.12-] {+2.25.13+}


So how did this happen? It's rather easy to reproduce: normally, I build a 
source package with debuild -S, then I test build this with pbuilder and
then upload. If I however once build devscrips directly, that is without
pbuilder but directly with debuild or debuild -b, all following source 
builds get those files in scripts/build/scripts-3.1*.

I suppose the fix for this is to cleanup scripts/build with the clean target.



[ Reason ]
All the above. Especially those 3 fixes.

[ Impact ]
Those 3 fixes plus two translation updates will be missing from trixie, also
we'll ship an unclean source package.


[ Tests ]
autopkgtests, been in sid for 3 days and thus used by many DDs, plus been
installed on the worker nodes for reproduce.debian.net since 3 days as well.

[ Risks ]
not really, those are all rather trivial changes.

[ Checklist ]
  [x] all changes are documented in the d/changelog
  [x] I reviewed all changes and I approve them
  [x] attach debdiff against the package in testing

[ Other info ]
I'll attach the compressed debdiff as a reply to this bug to make sure the bug
gets posted on the list. What's the max size for attachments again? Should I
include the full debdiff or can I filter translattions to reduce size?
I think maybe those questions could be answered in the "Unblock requests FAQ"
on release.d.o :)

The code diff is:

--- devscripts-2.25.12/scripts/debcommit.pl     2025-05-08 01:26:41.000000000 +0200
+++ devscripts-2.25.13/scripts/debcommit.pl     2025-05-22 12:00:39.000000000 +0200
@@ -453,6 +453,10 @@
             return "darcs";
         }
     }
+    if (-e ".git") {
+# With certain forms of git checkouts, .git can be a file instead of a directory
+        return "git";
+    }
     if (-d ".svn") {
         return "svn";
     }
@@ -472,10 +476,6 @@
     if (-d ".bzr") {
         return "bzr";
     }
-    if (-e ".git") {
-# With certain forms of git checkouts, .git can be a file instead of a directory
-        return "git";
-    }
     if (-d ".hg") {
         return "hg";
     }
--- devscripts-2.25.12/scripts/devscripts/proxy.py      2025-05-08 01:26:41.000000000 +0200
+++ devscripts-2.25.13/scripts/devscripts/proxy.py      2025-05-22 12:00:42.000000000 +0200
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@
         path = cachedir / sanitizedpath
 
         # just send back to client
-        if path.exists():
+        if path.exists() and path.stat().st_size > 0:
             self.wfile.write(b"HTTP/1.1 200 OK\r\n")
             self.send_header("Content-Length", path.stat().st_size)
             self.end_headers()
diff -Nru devscripts-2.25.12/scripts/mass-bug.pl devscripts-2.25.13/scripts/mass-bug.pl
--- devscripts-2.25.12/scripts/mass-bug.pl      2025-05-08 01:26:41.000000000 +0200
+++ devscripts-2.25.13/scripts/mass-bug.pl      2025-05-22 12:00:39.000000000 +0200
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@
 
 =item B<--include=FILENAME>
 
-Include the contents of B<FILENAME> in the template, replacing the #INCLUDE$
+Include the contents of B<FILENAME> in the template, replacing the #INCLUDE#
 placeholder. A %s in B<FILENAME> gets replaced by the current package name.
 
 =item B<--help>



The rest of the debdiff is translations and cleaned scripts/build/*.

unblock devscripts/2.25.13

Thanks for your work on trixie!

-- 
cheers,
	Holger

 ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
 ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
 ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
 ⠈⠳⣄

Make facts great again.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: