On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 04:35:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > As I report on debian-dpkg in > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm proposing to deploy a new dpkg status file parser. > > It would be bad if someone installed the new dpkg but then the new > dpkg rejected their status file. I think I've captured the complete > historical syntax as accepted generated by existing dpkg versions, but > the existing parser is rather too extensively- written to be able to > do a formal analysis. It is possible (even likely) that there > constructions accepted by the old parser but rejected by the new. I > want to be sure that no such constructions exist in the wild. > > So if you have a machine which you have reason to believe has unusual > entries in its status file, please send me copies of the unusual > stanzas. > > Alternatively, download the executable `perftest' > > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/git/dpkg/dpkg.speedup/build-tree/src/perftest > and run > .../perftest a1 y > which should print `done y' and not complain about any syntax errors.
When asking on people a public mailing list to download and run binaries, I sugges you at least sign your email; providing sources would be even better. Running unknown binaries isn't exactly recommended practise =) Regards: David -- /) David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /) Rime on my window (\ // ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire // \) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
