We were discussions the restrictions on buildinfo identifiers:

                          this part

The proposal was “the string should consist only of alphanumeric
characters and hyphens”. Guillem made the following comment while
reviewing the patches for dpkg:

Guillem Jover:
> Can we just simply use the package name rules instead? It also avoids
> potential problems with case and similar. (There's a
> pkg_name_is_illegal function in Dpkg::Package already.)

After reaching out to Ansgar with a patch for dak to implement the
above, he replied:

Ansgar Burchardt:
> The allowed sets for package names and the suffix of buildinfo
> filenames won't be the same even with that change.  However currently
> the suffix of buildinfo filenames matches what is allowed for .changes
> files.
> I'm not sure why allowing capital letters used in the suffix of
> buildinfo files should be an issue? After all we allow capital letters
> for both version numbers (part of the filename) and in names of changes
> files.
> (In the other direction not everything allowed as a package name can be
> used as the suffix of .changes and .buildinfo files either.)

Guillem, any further comments? Do you have any strong opposition to the
initial proposal?

Lunar                                .''`. 
lu...@debian.org                    : :Ⓐ  :  # apt-get install anarchism
                                    `. `'` 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reproducible-builds mailing list

Reply via email to