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

Re: Two bug fixes for ncrack



Dear Sven,

On 2024-01-06 10:58:41 +0100, Sven Geuer wrote:
On Fri, 2024-01-05 at 20:59 +0000, Peter Wienemann wrote:
The suggested fix for #1048666 works but it is
not particularly nice. If someone knows a smarter way how to address
this issue, I am eager to learn about it.

Instead of extending d/rules I propose to drop the offending files in
advance by a patch. This way there is not need to save and restore
them. Refer to [1] as an example.

You can create such a patch easily via 'dquilt shell'. See [2] and [3]
if you are not familiar with it

[1] https://salsa.debian.org/debian-remote-team/tightvnc/-/blob/debian/master/debian/patches/remove-upstream-build-system.patch?ref_type=heads
[2] https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debmake-doc/ch03.en.html#quilt-setup
[3] https://manpages.debian.org/bookworm/quilt/quilt.1.en.html#shell

many thanks for your suggestion and the illustrative example. Trying to use a patch to remove and restore the clobbered files has not come to my mind so far. What I like about your approach is that it is more straightforward. What makes me a bit hesitant in this particular case is the size of the needed patch to accomplish this: It is tens of thousands of lines. So at least in terms of diff size it is more invasive. Considering both options I do not have a clear preference. But maybe others do. :-)

On 2024-01-06 11:28:30 +0100, Sven Geuer wrote:
> An additional approach worth to explore is to patch upstream's
> Makefile.in files to do the clean job correctly. Some parts are already
> available as distclean targets.

I think this approach can only solve issues caused by an incomplete clean-up of build remnants. However in the given case one needs to restore the original state of files modified during the build. Therefore I fear that this second approach does not solve the problem at hand.

Thanks again for your input. It was very instructive.

Best regards,

Peter


Reply to: