Processed: Re: Processed: merging dpkg bugs
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 29178 dpkg-ftp Bug#29178: problem with FTP install Bug reassigned from package `dpkg' to `dpkg-ftp'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Ian Jackson (administrator, Debian bugs database)
Bug#32828: dpkg-dev: control.tar.gz and data.tar.gz containing ./
On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote: > On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > There might be dotfiles in DEBIAN. > > This should not be a problem. If the tar invocation is changed from > "tar ." to "tar *" as the reporter suggests, these > dotfiles would be included as well because they are inside the > DEBIAN directory. Look: No, this is not the case, because those files are not tarred with the DEBIAN directory, but inside... Anyway it could be * .* with . and .. excluded -- Madarasz Gergely [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's practically impossible to look at a penguin and feel angry. Egy pingvinre gyakorlatilag lehetetlen haragosan nezni. HuLUG: http://mlf.linux.rulez.org/
Bug#32828: dpkg-dev: control.tar.gz and data.tar.gz containing ./
On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Ian Jackson wrote: > There might be dotfiles in DEBIAN. This should not be a problem. If the tar invocation is changed from "tar ." to "tar *" as the reporter suggests, these dotfiles would be included as well because they are inside the DEBIAN directory. Look: $ mkdir DEBIAN $ touch DEBIAN/.dotfile $ tar czvf dummy.tgz * DEBIAN/ DEBIAN/.dotfile As you see, they are included. The only files that would *not* be included would be dotfiles in / Since they are not allowed by any FHS or FSSTND standard that I know this should not be a problem. > > Ian. > > (closing this bug report) > > I dont think this is apropriate here :( Any comments from others ? Ian, are you really concerned about the unability to create Debian packages containing dotfiles in the root directory?
Bug#32828: dpkg-dev: control.tar.gz and data.tar.gz containing ./
On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Madarasz Gergely writes ("Bug#32828: dpkg-dev: control.tar.gz and data.tar.gz
> containing ./"):
> > Package: dpkg-dev
> > Version: 1.4.0.31
> >
> > I've just wanted to check a packages contents and control information,
> > and it made my /tmp almost unusable.
> > I did tar xzvf control.tar.gz in /tmp, and since control.tar.gz contains
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 1999-02-01 19:21 ./
> > it rewrote the perms of /tmp to 755 -> I got a non-working /tmp. It may
> > happen in other directories, even when not run as root...
>
> Don't Do That Then.
How should everybody know that this is dangerous? I had friends who
told me that their /tmp mysteriously lost its permissions, and who
never understood why. Now I understand. One would never expect that the
permissions of current directory can be changed because of a simple tar
command.
> > I guess the reason for this is that debian/tmp/DEBIAN was tarred as the
> > current directory. The above case shows that it should be avoided, so it
> > would be nicer if tar was called with tar * instead of tar
> > .
>
> There might be dotfiles in DEBIAN.
Then tar .* with excluding .. and . could do it.
>
> Ian.
> (closing this bug report)
I dont think this is apropriate here :( Any comments from others ?
--
Madarasz Gergely [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's practically impossible to look at a penguin and feel angry.
Egy pingvinre gyakorlatilag lehetetlen haragosan nezni.
HuLUG: http://mlf.linux.rulez.org/
Bug#32828: marked as done (dpkg-dev: control.tar.gz and data.tar.gz containing ./)
Your message dated Wed, 3 Feb 1999 18:01:11 + (GMT) with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#32828: dpkg-dev: control.tar.gz and data.tar.gz containing ./ has caused the attached bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I'm talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Ian Jackson (administrator, Debian bugs database) Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 Feb 1999 17:21:12 + Received: (qmail 4882 invoked from network); 3 Feb 1999 17:21:11 - Received: from mlf.linux.rulez.org ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) by master.debian.org with SMTP; 3 Feb 1999 17:21:11 - Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by mlf.linux.rulez.org (8.8.8/8.8.8/Debian/GNU) id SAA21446; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 18:21:03 +0100 Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 18:21:03 +0100 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Madarasz Gergely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: dpkg-dev: control.tar.gz and data.tar.gz containing ./ To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: bug 3.1.7 Package: dpkg-dev Version: 1.4.0.31 I've just wanted to check a packages contents and control information, and it made my /tmp almost unusable. I did tar xzvf control.tar.gz in /tmp, and since control.tar.gz contains drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 1999-02-01 19:21 ./ it rewrote the perms of /tmp to 755 -> I got a non-working /tmp. It may happen in other directories, even when not run as root... I guess the reason for this is that debian/tmp/DEBIAN was tarred as the current directory. The above case shows that it should be avoided, so it would be nicer if tar was called with tar * instead of tar . -- System Information Debian Release: 2.0 Kernel Version: Linux mlf 2.0.36 #1 Tue Feb 2 12:46:29 CET 1999 i586 unknown Versions of the packages dpkg-dev depends on: ii perl5.004.04-6 Larry Wall's Practical Extracting and Report
Bug#32828: dpkg-dev: control.tar.gz and data.tar.gz containing ./
Package: dpkg-dev Version: 1.4.0.31 I've just wanted to check a packages contents and control information, and it made my /tmp almost unusable. I did tar xzvf control.tar.gz in /tmp, and since control.tar.gz contains drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 1999-02-01 19:21 ./ it rewrote the perms of /tmp to 755 -> I got a non-working /tmp. It may happen in other directories, even when not run as root... I guess the reason for this is that debian/tmp/DEBIAN was tarred as the current directory. The above case shows that it should be avoided, so it would be nicer if tar was called with tar * instead of tar . -- System Information Debian Release: 2.0 Kernel Version: Linux mlf 2.0.36 #1 Tue Feb 2 12:46:29 CET 1999 i586 unknown Versions of the packages dpkg-dev depends on: ii perl5.004.04-6 Larry Wall's Practical Extracting and Report
Re: Dpkg fails to install certain package
On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Jake Griesbach wrote: > > > On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Jules Bean wrote: > > > > > Jake, just to be sure, are you also using gnome-session? > > Yes, my configuration seems to match yours exactly. The eterms which > gnome-session executes upon startup are the ones with the SIGPIPE problem. > Any eterms created by enlightenment work properly. Thanks for all your > help Jules. I'm filing a bug against gnome-session about this. In the meanwhile, if you want, I can send you a fixed /usr/bin/gnome-session, if you like. (Fixed with a slightly inelegant hack, but it works). Jules /+---+-\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd| | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| TW9 2TF *UK* | ++---+-+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \--/
Re: Dpkg fails to install certain package
On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Jules Bean wrote: > > Jake, just to be sure, are you also using gnome-session? Yes, my configuration seems to match yours exactly. The eterms which gnome-session executes upon startup are the ones with the SIGPIPE problem. Any eterms created by enlightenment work properly. Thanks for all your help Jules. Jake
Re: Dpkg fails to install certain packages
On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Joey Hess writes ("Re: Dpkg fails to install certain packages"):
> > I doubt this is a dpkg bug, it looks like the files you downloaded are
> > corrupted, either on the mirror you got them from, or were corrupted during
> > download.
>
> No, this is the SIGPIPE set to SIG_IGN bug. It is not a bug in dpkg.
> How was dpkg invoked ?
>
It transpires that this is neither an eterm bug, nor a dpkg bug.
In fact the bug lies (for me) in gnome-session, and manifests in any
terminal I launch from the panel. Terminals launched directly from my
window manager (enlightenment) don't manifest this problem - which
suggests that enlightenment plays with SIGPIPE anyway.
I have confirm that SIGPIPE is set to SIG_IGN on any child of
gnome-session, and is SIG_DFL at the beginning of the execution of
.xsession - which points, for me, firmly at gnome-session.
I'm unpacking gnome-core source, and I'll try to find a patch. It's
unlikely that I'll be able to compile and test here - I don't have the
disk space. However, I will forward the patch to the BTS, as a bug in
gnome-core.
Jake, just to be sure, are you also using gnome-session?
Jules
/+---+-\
| Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd|
| Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| TW9 2TF *UK* |
++---+-+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\--/
Re: Dpkg fails to install certain packages
On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
> > Joey Hess writes ("Re: Dpkg fails to install certain packages"):
> > > I doubt this is a dpkg bug, it looks like the files you downloaded are
> > > corrupted, either on the mirror you got them from, or were corrupted
> > > during
> > > download.
> >
> > No, this is the SIGPIPE set to SIG_IGN bug. It is not a bug in dpkg.
> > How was dpkg invoked ?
>
> Could we just patch dpkg to set SIGPIPE to what it expects when it starts
> up? For such an important tool it seems a bit silly to have this bug
> persist :<
I'd rather we didn't fix it in dpkg, personally.
I'd rather we fixed it at source.
As I said earlier, it doesn't seem to be a bug in Eterm - but maybe other
terminal emulators have a 'fix' which masks the bug which really exists,
as Ian suggests, in xdm or startx, or the Xserver itself.
I have 'fixed' it in Eterm here by compiling a new version of Eterm which
clears SIGPIPE when it spawns a child process. This seems to be the Wrong
Way (tm), though...
If anyone here knows of a clever way to check signal disposition at every
stage of the boot process, I'd be grateful..
I'm going to write a quick hack to use sigaction to check the disposition
of SIGPIPE, and see if I can see when the problem comes in.
Jules
/+---+-\
| Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd|
| Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| TW9 2TF *UK* |
++---+-+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\--/
Processed: Maintainer Unknown
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 32209 xserver-svga Bug#32209: xserver Bug reassigned from package `xserver-*' to `xserver-svga'. > reassign 32213 man-db Bug#32213: man installed setuid root Bug assigned to package `man-db'. > reassign 32282 boot-floppies Bug#32282: Boot Floppies v2.1.5; drv1440tecra disk does not install correctly Bug assigned to package `boot-floppies'. > reassign 32284 netbase Bug#32284: Using kernel 2.2.0-final, everytime a new TCP connection is made to the box (i.e. telnet, ftp, etc...), a Bug assigned to package `netbase'. > reassign 32513 bbdb Bug#32513: Documentation error in BigBrother Bug assigned to package `bbdb'. > reassign 32672 util-linux Bug#32672: util-linux 2.9g-6 sparc patches Bug assigned to package `util-linux'. > reassign 32678 www.debian.org Bug#32678: Mailing List archives doesn't handle signed messages Bug assigned to package `www.debian.org'. > reassign 32683 postfix Bug#32683: Postfix mail locks Bug assigned to package `postfix'. > reassign 32702 wwwoffle Bug#32702: wwwoffled runs as root Bug assigned to package `wwwoffle'. > reassign 32703 dpkg Bug#32703: Dpkg fails to install certain packages Bug assigned to package `dpkg'. > reassign 32734 xemacs20-bin Bug#32734: xemacs20-20.4: can't find include files when compileing Bug reassigned from package `xemacs20-20.4' to `xemacs20-bin'. > reassign 32748 nfs-server Bug#32748: nfs copy failed with I/O Error Bug reassigned from package `nfs' to `nfs-server'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Ian Jackson (administrator, Debian bugs database)
Bug#32765: dpkg-dev: various scripting bugs
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.4.0.31 (+later?)
Here are a few bugs I noticed in certain of the scripts which probably
haven't been fixed yet. I haven't bothered giving diffs, as there are
going to be so many changes to so much stuff, by the looks of it, that
it won't necessarily be of much help.
I'm looking forward to Ian having the time now to work on it: good luck!!
dpkg-parsechangelog
===
Does not accept a -h option; needs the line
if (m/^-h$/) { &usageversion; exit(0); }
near the end of the main while(@ARGV) loop.
parsechangelog/debian
=
There is a missing + in the regexp for examining the final line of
a changelog section; it does not allow a time zone such as (GMT).
The line should read:
} elsif (m/^ \-\- (.*) <(.*)>
((\w+\,\s*)?\d{1,2}\s+\w+\s+\d{4}\s+\d{1,2}:\d\d:\d\d\s+[-+]\d{4}(\s+\([^\\\(\)]+\))?)$/)
{
with an extra '+' after the [^\\\(\)].
dpkg-genchanges
===
Typo in section:
for $_ (keys %fi) {
...
if (s/^C //) {
...
elsif (m/^X[BS]+-|...
with no '|' before the ^X.
controllib.pl
=
There are problems when capit is applied to a field name such as
XB-Foobar. I would suggest something like the following
replacement (untested):
sub capit {
if ($_[0] =~ m/^(X[BCS]+)-(.*)/i) {
return uc($1) .
( defined($capit{lc($2)}) ? $capit{lc($2)} : ucfirst(lc($2)) );
} else {
return ( defined($capit{lc($_[0])}) ?
$capit{lc($_[0])} : ucfirst(lc($_[0])) );
}
}
One could even envisage a function capit which broke the input into
hyphen-separated segments and capitalised each one:
sub capit {
my (@parts,@capit_parts);
@parts = split /-/, $_[0];
@capit_parts = map { ucfirst(lc($_)) } @parts;
if ($parts[0] =~ /^X[BCS]+/i) { @capit_parts[0] = uc($parts[0]); }
return join '-', @capit_parts;
}
This would make the field names much more consistent in form and do
away with the need for the exceptions array (although it could be
retained if desired).
dpkg-gencontrol
===
There's a problem if there's an _all.deb file created and
dpkg-gencontrol is run more than once -- the file ends up being
listed multiple times. This is due to the line near the end of the
code (and \d could replace 0-9 in the character class):
if (open(X,"< $fileslistfile")) {
while () {
s/\n$//; # chomp would probably be nicer here, incidentally ;-)
next if m/^([-+0-9a-z.]+)_[^_]+_([-\w]+)\.deb /
&& ($1 eq $oppackage) && ($2 eq $arch);
whereas the last line should read something like:
&& ($1 eq $oppackage) && ($2 eq $arch or $2 eq 'all');
HTH,
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dept of Mathematical Sciences, Queen Mary & Westfield College,
Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, ENGLAND
-*- Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for my PGP public key. -*-
