Bug#698656: ITP: adequate -- Debian package quality testing tool
Am Montag, den 21.01.2013, 22:40 +0100 schrieb Jakub Wilk:
> * Benjamin Drung <email@example.com>, 2013-01-21, 21:16:
> >>* Package name : adequate
> >> Version : 0.3
> >> Upstream Author : Jakub Wilk <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >>* URL : http://jwilk.net/software/adequate
> >>* License : Expat
> >> Programming Lang: Perl
> >> Description : Debian package quality testing tool
> >>adequate checks quality of installed packages.
> >>The following checks are currently implemented:
> >What's the advantage of adequate over lintian?
> They have different scopes:
> - Lintian is a static analysis tool;
> - adequate examines the system on which the tested package has been
> already installed to see if everything is in order.
> That said, many of the Lintian checks could be re-implemented in
> adequate. However, I specifically avoided implementing anything that
> could be adequately (no pun intended) done by Lintian.
> Let me go through the list of the checks:
> >> * broken symlinks;
> Lintian's package-contains-broken-symlink implementation is prone to
> tons of false positive; this is unfixable because Lintian lacks
> information about foreign packages.
> >> * missing copyright file;
> no-copyright-file is emitted by Lintian only if the copyright file is
> shipped in the binary package. But Lintian can't possibly know that
> /usr/share/doc/$pkg/ will disappear on upgrade.
> >> * obsolete conffiles;
> Lintian can't possibly catch this.
> >> * Python modules not byte-compiled;
> lintian4python has a check for this, which works reasonably well, but
> only under assumptions that 1) the packages use helpers for
> byte-compilation and 2) the helpers actually do their job correctly.
> >> * /bin and /sbin binaries requiring /usr/lib libraries;
> >> * underlinked binaries or libraries.
> Lintian lacks information about foreign packages to perform these
> I hope this answers your question. :)
Yes. Thanks for the details.
Debian & Ubuntu Developer