Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Thomas Bushnell:
>
>> What do you think "orig" means in "orig.tar.gz"?
>
> At the moment, it's a sequence of four ASCII characters without any
> particular meaning. Many maintainers use repackaged sources because
> they want to include multiple tarbal
Scripsit Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sure you can. Lintian could (relatively) easily check whether the
> problem is in the .orig.tar.gz before application of the Debian diff,
> and suppress the message in that case.
Better yet: Warn if
(there are CVS directories in the .diff.gz)
OR ((t
On Sun, 02 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 02 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >> Easily caught: check to make sure the CVS files are not in the
> >> .orig.tz before complaining.
> >
> > You keep assuming the bogus stu
On Sun, 02 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> No; it should not report uncorrectible warnings.
> > *IT* *IS* *NOT* *UNCORRECTIBLE*. If you have a good reason to, you can and
> > should correct it. You are just not supposed to do it
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 02 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Easily caught: check to make sure the CVS files are not in the
>> .orig.tz before complaining.
>
> You keep assuming the bogus stuff ends up in the diff. It once happened to
> me that it en
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> No; it should not report uncorrectible warnings.
>
> *IT* *IS* *NOT* *UNCORRECTIBLE*. If you have a good reason to, you can and
> should correct it. You are just not supposed to do it just to shut lintian
> up, use an override for that.
On Sun, 02 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Easily caught: check to make sure the CVS files are not in the
> .orig.tz before complaining.
You keep assuming the bogus stuff ends up in the diff. It once happened to
me that it ended up on the .orig.tar.gz, but I don't recall exactly what
kind o
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> dpkg-buildpackage in a cvs-checkout directory with strange things in the
> parent dir, for example, because of test builds leaving weird shit on the
> parent directory + lack of coffee + typing dpkg-buildpackage instead of
> cvs-buildpackag
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 03:07:51AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > But lintian is not there to warn about unfixable problems with
>
> You cannot reliably determine wether the maintainer is doing something
> stupid, or upstream is.
Su
On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 06:59:19PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Or those who screw up and add it to a non-orig .orig.tar.gz (and by that I
> >> do NOT mean a modified upstream one, I mean
On Sat, 01 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sat, 01 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >> But lintian is not there to warn about unfixable problems with
> >
> > You cannot reliably determine wether the maintainer is doing some
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 01 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> But lintian is not there to warn about unfixable problems with
>
> You cannot reliably determine wether the maintainer is doing something
> stupid, or upstream is.
In which case, it certai
On Sat, 01 Oct 2005, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 14:55:18 -0400, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >If you want to maintain a package using cvs-buildpackage, you *have*
> >to remove those files from the orig.tar.gz.
>
> Does that hold for debian/ only setups as well?
It does
On Sat, 01 Oct 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> But lintian is not there to warn about unfixable problems with
You cannot reliably determine wether the maintainer is doing something
stupid, or upstream is.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and
On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 14:55:18 -0400, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>If you want to maintain a package using cvs-buildpackage, you *have*
>to remove those files from the orig.tar.gz.
Does that hold for debian/ only setups as well?
Greetings
Marc
--
--
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
>> It's not really a bogus warning; the point of it is so that you're
>> aware so that you can remind upstream not to distribute CVS files in
>> their tarballs.
>
> Isn't getting nasty CVS directories in the source tree that you work
> o
On Sat, 01 Oct 2005, Eric Dorland wrote:
> If you want to maintain a package using cvs-buildpackage, you *have*
> to remove those files from the orig.tar.gz.
This is false. cvs-upgrade -F and cvs-inject -F solves your problem.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to
* Thomas Bushnell BSG ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> The lintian warning source-contains-CVS-dir is bogus.
>
> I agree that upstream should not put CVS in their tarballs. But
> sometimes they do.
>
> When they do, it is a violation of Debian standards to remove it from
> the orig.tar.gz file.
Don Armstrong wrote:
> It's not really a bogus warning; the point of it is so that you're
> aware so that you can remind upstream not to distribute CVS files in
> their tarballs.
Isn't getting nasty CVS directories in the source tree that you work
on while maintaining the package reminder enough t
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> It does make sense to warn against Debian developers who have *added*
>>> a CVS directory not present in the upstream source, but that's a
>>> different matter.
>>
>> Or those who screw
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And lintian does pester about outdated config.sub/guess, etc. These
> warnings are useful from time to time.
Those problems can be fixed without violating Debian rules too. :)
>> It does make sense to warn against Debian developers who h
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Laszlo Boszormenyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> When they do, it is a violation of Debian standards to remove it from
> >> the orig.tar.gz file. So there is no question of doing that.
>
> > Where do you read that? May be true, but can't remem
> You may decide that removing the CVS files from the orig is worse than
> having them there,[1] but it doesn't excuse the fact that having them
> there is bad (or at least stupid.)
It also helps a lot when *we*, as upstream for native packages,
inadvertently include a CVS or .svn directory in an
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> The lintian warning source-contains-CVS-dir is bogus.
>
> I agree that upstream should not put CVS in their tarballs. But
> sometimes they do.
>
> So, it's a bogus warning. It should be removed from lintian.
It's not really a bogus warning; the po
* Thomas Bushnell:
> What do you think "orig" means in "orig.tar.gz"?
At the moment, it's a sequence of four ASCII characters without any
particular meaning. Many maintainers use repackaged sources because
they want to include multiple tarballs in their source packages, even
though there's no ne
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The lintian warning source-contains-CVS-dir is bogus.
>
>> I agree that upstream should not put CVS in their tarballs. But
>> sometimes they do.
>
> It's still useful for native packages, so it isn't c
Laszlo Boszormenyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 23:34 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> When they do, it is a violation of Debian standards to remove it from
>> the orig.tar.gz file. So there is no question of doing that.
> Where do you read that? May be true, but can'
Laszlo Boszormenyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> When they do, it is a violation of Debian standards to remove it from
>> the orig.tar.gz file. So there is no question of doing that.
> Where do you read that? May be true, but can't remember any place ATM.
What do you think "orig" means in "or
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The lintian warning source-contains-CVS-dir is bogus.
> I agree that upstream should not put CVS in their tarballs. But
> sometimes they do.
It's still useful for native packages, so it isn't completely bogus even
if one agrees with the point ab
On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 23:34 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> The lintian warning source-contains-CVS-dir is bogus.
It is not.
> I agree that upstream should not put CVS in their tarballs. But
> sometimes they do.
Unfortunately.
> When they do, it is a violation of Debian standards to remove
The lintian warning source-contains-CVS-dir is bogus.
I agree that upstream should not put CVS in their tarballs. But
sometimes they do.
When they do, it is a violation of Debian standards to remove it from
the orig.tar.gz file. So there is no question of doing that.
If you remove the CVS fil
31 matches
Mail list logo
