On 2011-06-28 19:02, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Niels Thykier <ni...@thykier.net> writes:
>
>> For this I was wondering if
>
>> my $job = { err => 'index-errors', ... }
>
>> appends the output to 'index-errors' or truncates the file before
>> writing.
>
> It truncates currently. Lintian::Command could be modified to make it
> append, though, which may not be a bad idea. I think all one would have
> to do is change 2> to 2>>.
>
That was easy to do - I decided to implement this by using a new option
for it instead of changing the behaviour of out/err. Makes life less
interesting. :)
>> Alternatively, would we rather want cruft to handle multiple index-error
>> files (one for each tarball)?
>
> I'm not sure it's worth the effort. Errors there happen rarely.
>
I was not sure either, but I wanted to mention a possible alternative.
>> Secondly, if I understand the situation correctly, I believe the version
>> of collection/index.desc should be updated with this change (to ensure
>> the index are re-generated). But since file-info generates its output
>> from the index file, file-info should be re-run as well.
>> Unfortunately, if I understand frontend/lintian correctly this will
>> not happen automatically. Since file-info succeeded in the past, there
>> should already be a ".file-info-1" file in the lab and the update of
>> index will not make frontend/lintian remove that (or have I missed
>> something?).
>
> I think that's correct. Collection scripts should probably check the
> version placeholders of all their dependencies as well, but I don't think
> they currently do that.
>
Personally I sort of figured our make-shift resolver ought to deal with
that. Especially since the collections are being run in parallel.
~Niels
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-lint-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e0afdf2.9000...@thykier.net
