[ Could you please line-wrap your mails correctly in the future? Replying to those or in fact even reading them on the web archive (as I keep not receiving them) is painful, thanks. ]
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 17:43:11 -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote: > Package: dpkg > Version: 1.17.9 > Severity: wishlist > dpkg allows verifying a package's integrity using the --verify command: > As this doesn't explain how the results are reported, one has to check > the description of --verify-format: > When this says "The only currently supported output format is rpm, > which consists of a line for every path that failed any check.", the > reader has no idea what checks are being referred. The paragraph > later explains "currently the only functional check is an md5sum > verification against the stored value in the files database, denoted > with a '5' on the third character". > > I suggest to move check descriptions to the explanation of --verify, > which could say that the integrity verification consists of a number > of integrity checks, only one of which is currently functional. Ok, I guess that makes sense, I'll do that for 1.17.10. > It would be great if the end result made it clear that --verify can't > currently confirm a package's integrity (or, alternatively, explained > how to interpret empty output). Rigth, for packages with missing md5sums it will not perform any check, I'll document that, and that the best way to fix it is to follow the instructions from running «dpkg --audit». Thanks, Guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
