Re: [gentoo-dev] about non-ebuild files in the tree (and verification thereof)
W dniu śro, 28.02.2018 o godzinie 16∶10 +0100, użytkownik Fabian Groffen napisał: > Hi, > > I'm working on a verification implementation of > https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0074.html and ran into the following > scenario that I don't know if it's right or wrong: > > Consider net-misc/srf-ip-conn-srv > % ls > files Manifest metadata.xml srf-ip-conn-srv-.ebuild > srf-ip-conn-srv.pid > % cat Manifest > DIST jsmn-35086597a72d.tar.gz 11056 > DIST srf-ip-conn-140c9b8a8619.tar.gz 112882 > > Notice that there is a .pid file in the ebuild dir, checked in git, > which even contains what appears to be a pid. It isn't used from the > ebuild as far as I can tell. Apart from being odd, this is actually > irrelevant. > > In an rsync checkout of the gentoo-x86 tree, I see in the Manifest for > this package a DATA entry for the .pid-file. Hence, verification with > both gemato as well as my own implementation succeed because the > .pid-file is acknowledged. > > Now in a rsync checkout of the Prefix tree, where my own implementation > also runs the fat manifest creation, this entry is not present, because > I always believed only metadata.xml, ChangeLog* and *.ebuild files were > allowed. > > Now I'm confused as to whether this is the case or not, I can't find a > GLEP or anything, but repoman also is as happy as it can be on this odd > file (I thought it used to complain about stray/unadded files). > > Does anybody know or have a pointer to what the policies on files in our > ebuild dirs actually is? > I'm going to have the usual answer here: it was not rejected because nobody predicted such a thing could happen. Since ebuilds do not have a clear way of accessing this file, there is no clear reason why anyone would try to add such a file. Plus, given it's a special location (again, not accessible directly to ebuilds) there's the argument of forward compatibility others mentioned. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
Re: [gentoo-dev] about non-ebuild files in the tree (and verification thereof)
On 28-02-2018 22:08:54 +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 04:10:52PM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm working on a verification implementation of > > https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0074.html and ran into the following > > scenario that I don't know if it's right or wrong: > ... > > Does anybody know or have a pointer to what the policies on files in our > > ebuild dirs actually is? > PMS, 4.3 Package directories: > A package directory may contain other files or directories, whose > purpose is not covered by this specification. Ah, forwards compatibility. > GLEP74 itself makes no determination of files being permitted in a given > directory. > > > Now in a rsync checkout of the Prefix tree, where my own implementation > > also runs the fat manifest creation, this entry is not present, because > > I always believed only metadata.xml, ChangeLog* and *.ebuild files were > > allowed. > I'd say your separate implementation is wrong in this case, but that > file also should not permit at this time. I might change it not to bother about what should be in/out, but just assume it's right as-is. For now it is a nice headsup about something being unexpected. > > Now I'm confused as to whether this is the case or not, I can't find a > > GLEP or anything, but repoman also is as happy as it can be on this odd > > file (I thought it used to complain about stray/unadded files). > I personally think repoman should complain about it because it's weird. I'm sure this particular file was a mistake, that went unnoticed for a very long time. I do feel this should one way or the other not be allowed. Thanks for your insights, Fabian -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] about non-ebuild files in the tree (and verification thereof)
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 04:10:52PM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote: > Hi, > > I'm working on a verification implementation of > https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0074.html and ran into the following > scenario that I don't know if it's right or wrong: ... > Does anybody know or have a pointer to what the policies on files in our > ebuild dirs actually is? PMS, 4.3 Package directories: A package directory may contain other files or directories, whose purpose is not covered by this specification. GLEP74 itself makes no determination of files being permitted in a given directory. > Now in a rsync checkout of the Prefix tree, where my own implementation > also runs the fat manifest creation, this entry is not present, because > I always believed only metadata.xml, ChangeLog* and *.ebuild files were > allowed. I'd say your separate implementation is wrong in this case, but that file also should not permit at this time. > Now I'm confused as to whether this is the case or not, I can't find a > GLEP or anything, but repoman also is as happy as it can be on this odd > file (I thought it used to complain about stray/unadded files). I personally think repoman should complain about it because it's weird. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Treasurer E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
[gentoo-dev] about non-ebuild files in the tree (and verification thereof)
Hi, I'm working on a verification implementation of https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0074.html and ran into the following scenario that I don't know if it's right or wrong: Consider net-misc/srf-ip-conn-srv % ls files Manifest metadata.xml srf-ip-conn-srv-.ebuild srf-ip-conn-srv.pid % cat Manifest DIST jsmn-35086597a72d.tar.gz 11056 DIST srf-ip-conn-140c9b8a8619.tar.gz 112882 Notice that there is a .pid file in the ebuild dir, checked in git, which even contains what appears to be a pid. It isn't used from the ebuild as far as I can tell. Apart from being odd, this is actually irrelevant. In an rsync checkout of the gentoo-x86 tree, I see in the Manifest for this package a DATA entry for the .pid-file. Hence, verification with both gemato as well as my own implementation succeed because the .pid-file is acknowledged. Now in a rsync checkout of the Prefix tree, where my own implementation also runs the fat manifest creation, this entry is not present, because I always believed only metadata.xml, ChangeLog* and *.ebuild files were allowed. Now I'm confused as to whether this is the case or not, I can't find a GLEP or anything, but repoman also is as happy as it can be on this odd file (I thought it used to complain about stray/unadded files). Does anybody know or have a pointer to what the policies on files in our ebuild dirs actually is? Thanks, Fabian -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level signature.asc Description: PGP signature
