On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 03:35:01PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 02:24:39PM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 02:10:07PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > > > > Probably. Is the format of that file documented somewhere? > > > This is a list of key/value pair in RFC822 style. > > > See /usr/share/doc/popularity-contest/examples/bin/README.examples > > > for the format of the Package line. > > > > I have a few questions: > > > > How is the package name separated from the integer fields? It does not > > look like a fixed-width field: > > > > Package: abev-form-obhgepi-fpk-nav 0 0 0 2 > > Package: abev-form-obhgepi-fpk-nav-egyeb 0 0 0 2 > > > > If it is instead space-separated, currently I didn't see package names > > that contained spaces, but is there a guarantee that the package name > > won't contain spaces? > > It is garanteed that package name will not contain spaces. > > > Alternatively, should the parsing instead be done by splitting on \s+ > > from the right with a maximum of 4 splits? > > > > Some package names seem to be truncated, like this one: > > > > Package: apache-openoffice-4.1.4-linux-x86-install-rpm-de 0 0 0 > > 1 > > The server should not truncate anything. I will check what happened.
The package name is truncated in the submitter report already. Maybe dpkg-query truncated it, maybe it was truncated even before. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here.
