On Sun, 2014-01-19 at 19:30:19 -0500, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> On 2014-01-15 14:27, Guillem Jover wrote:
> >On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 13:20:38 -0500, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> >>>The only currently supported output format is rpm, which consists
> >>>of a line for every path that failed any check. The lines start
> >>>with 9 characters to report the specific check results, a '?'
> >>>implies the check could not be done (lack of support, file
> >>>permissions, etc), '.' implies the check passed, and an
> >>>alphanumeric character implies a specific check failed; the only
> >>>functional check is an md5sum verification denoted with a '5' on
> >>>the third character. The line is followed by a space and an
> >>>attribute character (currently 'c' for conffiles), another space
> >>>and the pathname.
> >>On my system, the rpm format gives:
> >>># dpkg --verify
> >>>??5?????? c /etc/sane.d/dll.conf
> >[…]
> >
> >>It would help understand what is wrong if the output explained why
> >>a check failed, or if the manpage documented what the third check does.
> >The md5sum verification failed, so the file's contents do not match
> >the recorded hash in the database.
> >
> >This is explained in the --verify and --verify-format options in the
> >man page, I'm not sure what information you find it's missing, TBH.
> Which recorded hash? The manpage doesn't say anything about hashes.
The md5sum hash…
The man page also says:
-V, --verify [package-name...]
Verifies the integrity of package-name or all packages if omit‐
ted, by comparing information from the installed paths with the
database metadata.
At this point, I'm just considering closing this report.
Guillem
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
