Hi! On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 11:32:14 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> writes: > > > I concur completely, and I'm considering rejecting such fields from > > > dpkg 1.17.x, for the reason above.
I've got a local commit now rejecting these, targetted for 1.17.2. > how about the attched patch ? I named ‘-’ hyphen because it is how it is > consistently called in the Policy (but unfortunately not in the > machine-readable specification for Debian copyright files). Yeah I think hyphen is the correct word to use, I'll unify the wording in dpkg too, there's some mentions of dash there. > Guillem, Russ, given your very positive opinion about the change, shall I list > you as seconding this patch ? I'm happy to second such change, although I've a nitpicking comment… > diff --git a/upgrading-checklist.sgml b/upgrading-checklist.sgml > index b58b740..883af61 100644 > --- a/upgrading-checklist.sgml > +++ b/upgrading-checklist.sgml > @@ -40,6 +40,10 @@ picking your way through this list. > Unreleased. > > </p><p><taglist> > +<tag>5.1</tag> > + <item>Control data fields must not start with the hyphen character > + (<tt>-</tt>) because it interferes with clearsigning control data files. > + </item> > <tag>5.4, 5.6.24</tag> > <item><tt>Checksums-Sha1</tt> and <tt>Checksums-Sha256</tt> are now > mandatory in <file>.dsc</file> files. Strictly speaking the problem is with (all?) deb822 parsers that do not dash-unescape clearsigned messages not with the possibly dash-escaped control files, proper dash-escaping is there precisely to avoid any interference from initial dashes. And the reason to ban initial hyphens is because they do not make sense in field names and I don't think it's worth updating all parsers. Thanks, Guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
