Re: Fwd: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
Daniel Macks wrote: I'm about to add a note about using -x'*~' and .orig and .rej =) --- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
Hi, On Feb 15, 2004, at 6:09 PM, Daniel Macks wrote: - Check dependencies, run something like this: 'dpkg -L wml | xargs otool -L' will list all libraries linked to by everything in that package. make sure it depends on each (didnt someone make a perl script to do that?.. i think so), and make sure none are BuildDependsOnly. Is there a script for checking it? I thought about writing one, but haven't found time to really look into it. If there is one, it would be very helpful to provide, best of course with 'fink validate'. - Try to check builddepends as much as possible (can be hard to get them all sometimes) Remember that Essntial packages do not get listed in Depends, but for essential -shlibs the -devel (or whatever other build tools) do get listed in BuildDepends. I think many packages screw up this last bit (probably mine included:( Question: is there any harm to list essential packages as Depends? I happen to do add essential packages to Depends just to balance any BuildDepends. Cheers, Remi - The Americans will always do the right thing... after they've exhausted all the alternatives. (Winston Churchill) * Remigius K. Mommsen e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] University of California, Irvine URL:http://cern.ch/mommsen c/o SLAC voice:++1 (650) 926-3595 2575 Sand Hill Road #35fax:++1 (650) 926-3882 Menlo Park, CA 94025, US home:++1 (650) 233-9041 * --- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: Fwd: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 12:28:20PM -0800, Ben Hines wrote: > > - Use a unified diff for patches Cool...saves me from having to fix the validator code for /sw in .patch:) > - patch files should be reasonable size, and all patches should be > necessary (no accidental patching of backup files, I'm about to add a note about using -x'*~' > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Ben Hines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > - Check for hardcoded /sws in the info and patch (should be %p) If you find any that are not caught by 'fink validate' please let us know so the validator code can be fixed. > > - Check dependencies, run something like this: 'dpkg -L wml | > > xargs otool -L' will list all libraries linked to by everything in > > that package. make sure it depends on each (didnt someone make a > > perl script to do that?.. i think so), and make sure none are > > BuildDependsOnly. > > - Try to check builddepends as much as possible (can be hard to get > > them all sometimes) Remember that Essntial packages do not get listed in Depends, but for essential -shlibs the -devel (or whatever other build tools) do get listed in BuildDepends. I think many packages screw up this last bit (probably mine included:( > > - Let them know if they are missing fink fields, like if they have > > a ..conf file but forgot ConfFiles: field, or are not using fields > > like ConfigureParams: InfoDocs and GCC are other often-overlooked fields. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks --- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: Fwd: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
At 12:28 -0800 15/2/04, Ben Hines wrote: Here's everything i look at, and some stuff i forgot. See quoted message below. - Check license, make sure it is correct - Emacs modules: must comply with emacs policy (/sw/share/doc/emacsen-common/debian-emacs-policy) - Use a unified diff for patches - patch files should be reasonable size, and all patches should be necessary (no accidental patching of backup files, no patching of .am files uncessarily) -Ben <-- long list of great stuff snipped --> It would be great to have a list like this in the documentation on the web site. Package maintainers could use it as a checklist before submitting a package to the tracker, and it would help provide some standardization when validating packages. Kevin Horton --- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Fwd: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
Here's everything i look at, and some stuff i forgot. See quoted message below. - Check license, make sure it is correct - Emacs modules: must comply with emacs policy (/sw/share/doc/emacsen-common/debian-emacs-policy) - Use a unified diff for patches - patch files should be reasonable size, and all patches should be necessary (no accidental patching of backup files, no patching of .am files uncessarily) -Ben Begin forwarded message: From: Ben Hines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: May 31, 2003 1:04:34 PM PDT To: mathias meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 09:16 AM, mathias meyer wrote: if there are some things to do (like checking md5sum fields a while ago) where you might apprechiate some help let me know, i'm happy to do that. I you want to, I would appreciate help validating new fink packages from the tracker... usually i check: - fink validate on the .deb file and the .info file - dpkg -c on the deb file just to make sure... make sure to do this for each splitoff. - Check for hardcoded /sws in the info and patch (should be %p) - Check for them touching anything outside of %d or %b during build and install. Not legal except in very special cases. - Make sure license and Homepage is in the package and is right - Make sure Maintainer is in the package and is the person who submitted the package. If not make sure they have the maintainer's permission. - Check dependencies, run something like this: 'dpkg -L wml | xargs otool -L' will list all libraries linked to by everything in that package. make sure it depends on each (didnt someone make a perl script to do that?.. i think so), and make sure none are BuildDependsOnly. - Try to check builddepends as much as possible (can be hard to get them all sometimes) - Make sure description is readable and appropriate - Sometimes I will let them know if they are doing crazy build hacks they don't need to be doing - Let them know if they are missing fink fields, like if they have a ..conf file but forgot ConfFiles: field, or are not using fields like ConfigureParams: - Make sure they have splitoffs if they include shared libraries, and comply with the full -shlibs policy if necessary. - Make sure library versions in the Shlibs: field are correct. - python modules: must comply with fink python policy - perl modules: must comply with fink perl module policy
Re: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
On Tuesday, June 3, 2003, at 02:23 AM, Rohan Lloyd wrote: It checks 2 things: 1. No files are placed directly in /sw/share/emacs/site-lisp (they should be in a package subdirectory) 2. No byte compiled .elc files are installed (they should be compiled during postInst by /sw/lib/emacsen-common/packages/install/ script) The code has a couple of special cases, because emacsen-common and emacs/xemacs themselves are allowed to do these things. I'm not sure that what I've got is right for xemacs. I don't use it, and I don't have the diskspace or patience to install it just to check it out. So there could be a lot of false errors for xemacs. Attached is a diff of the changes - please submit patches to the patch tracker, not the mailing list - please use unified diff - please actually test patches before submitting, it has bugs and does not even compile. It does give a lot of warnings on xemacs. Perhaps that package should be excluded if the .elc files are OK in that one. -Ben --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features you've never dreamed of, try TotalView 6 free at www.etnus.com. ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
On Tuesday, June 3, 2003, at 01:09 AM, David R. Morrison wrote: - python modules: must comply with fink python policy Is anybody willing to write a brief statement of what this policy is? I would then add it to the documentation. I'll also add the emacs policy, which Rohan pointed out. On the subject of emacs policy, I've just made some local modifications to Validation.pm to add some checks for emacs packages. It checks 2 things: 1. No files are placed directly in /sw/share/emacs/site-lisp (they should be in a package subdirectory) 2. No byte compiled .elc files are installed (they should be compiled during postInst by /sw/lib/emacsen-common/packages/install/ script) The code has a couple of special cases, because emacsen-common and emacs/xemacs themselves are allowed to do these things. I'm not sure that what I've got is right for xemacs. I don't use it, and I don't have the diskspace or patience to install it just to check it out. So there could be a lot of false errors for xemacs. Attached is a diff of the changes Validation.pm.diff Description: Binary data -- Rohan Lloyd
Re: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
> - python modules: must comply with fink python policy Is anybody willing to write a brief statement of what this policy is? I would then add it to the documentation. I'll also add the emacs policy, which Rohan pointed out. -- Dave --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay Get office equipment for less on eBay! http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
On Sunday, June 1, 2003, at 06:04 AM, Ben Hines wrote: On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 09:16 AM, mathias meyer wrote: if there are some things to do (like checking md5sum fields a while ago) where you might apprechiate some help let me know, i'm happy to do that. I you want to, I would appreciate help validating new fink packages from the tracker... usually i check: - fink validate on the .deb file and the .info file - dpkg -c on the deb file just to make sure... make sure to do this for each splitoff. - Check for hardcoded /sws in the info and patch (should be %p) - Check for them touching anything outside of %d or %b during build and install. Not legal except in very special cases. - Make sure license and Homepage is in the package and is right - Make sure Maintainer is in the package and is the person who submitted the package. If not make sure they have the maintainer's permission. - Check dependencies, run something like this: 'dpkg -L wml | xargs otool -L' will list all libraries linked to by everything in that package. make sure it depends on each (didnt someone make a perl script to do that?.. i think so), and make sure none are BuildDependsOnly. - Try to check builddepends as much as possible (can be hard to get them all sometimes) - Make sure description is readable and appropriate - Sometimes I will let them know if they are doing crazy build hacks they don't need to be doing - Let them know if they are missing fink fields, like if they have a .conf file but forgot ConfFiles: field, or are not using fields like ConfigureParams: - Make sure they have splitoffs if they include shared libraries, and comply with the full -shlibs policy if necessary. - Make sure library versions in the Shlibs: field are correct. - python modules: must comply with fink python policy - perl modules: must comply with fink perl module policy anything else I'm forgetting? :) I'd like to add: - Emacs modules: must comply with emacs policy (/sw/share/doc/emacsen-common/debian-emacs-policy) Currently very few do. -- Rohan Lloyd --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay Get office equipment for less on eBay! http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Validating fink packages documentation
Oh, if someone wants to make this into a nice 'quick checklist' we could put on the web site for new maintainers, that would be great. -Ben On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 01:04 PM, Ben Hines wrote: On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 09:16 AM, mathias meyer wrote: if there are some things to do (like checking md5sum fields a while ago) where you might apprechiate some help let me know, i'm happy to do that. I you want to, I would appreciate help validating new fink packages from the tracker... usually i check: - fink validate on the .deb file and the .info file - dpkg -c on the deb file just to make sure... make sure to do this for each splitoff. - Check for hardcoded /sws in the info and patch (should be %p) - Check for them touching anything outside of %d or %b during build and install. Not legal except in very special cases. - Make sure license and Homepage is in the package and is right - Make sure Maintainer is in the package and is the person who submitted the package. If not make sure they have the maintainer's permission. - Check dependencies, run something like this: 'dpkg -L wml | xargs otool -L' will list all libraries linked to by everything in that package. make sure it depends on each (didnt someone make a perl script to do that?.. i think so), and make sure none are BuildDependsOnly. - Try to check builddepends as much as possible (can be hard to get them all sometimes) - Make sure description is readable and appropriate - Sometimes I will let them know if they are doing crazy build hacks they don't need to be doing - Let them know if they are missing fink fields, like if they have a ..conf file but forgot ConfFiles: field, or are not using fields like ConfigureParams: - Make sure they have splitoffs if they include shared libraries, and comply with the full -shlibs policy if necessary. - Make sure library versions in the Shlibs: field are correct. - python modules: must comply with fink python policy - perl modules: must comply with fink perl module policy anything else I'm forgetting? :) -Ben --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay Get office equipment for less on eBay! http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay Get office equipment for less on eBay! http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Validating fink packages
On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 09:16 AM, mathias meyer wrote: if there are some things to do (like checking md5sum fields a while ago) where you might apprechiate some help let me know, i'm happy to do that. I you want to, I would appreciate help validating new fink packages from the tracker... usually i check: - fink validate on the .deb file and the .info file - dpkg -c on the deb file just to make sure... make sure to do this for each splitoff. - Check for hardcoded /sws in the info and patch (should be %p) - Check for them touching anything outside of %d or %b during build and install. Not legal except in very special cases. - Make sure license and Homepage is in the package and is right - Make sure Maintainer is in the package and is the person who submitted the package. If not make sure they have the maintainer's permission. - Check dependencies, run something like this: 'dpkg -L wml | xargs otool -L' will list all libraries linked to by everything in that package. make sure it depends on each (didnt someone make a perl script to do that?.. i think so), and make sure none are BuildDependsOnly. - Try to check builddepends as much as possible (can be hard to get them all sometimes) - Make sure description is readable and appropriate - Sometimes I will let them know if they are doing crazy build hacks they don't need to be doing - Let them know if they are missing fink fields, like if they have a .conf file but forgot ConfFiles: field, or are not using fields like ConfigureParams: - Make sure they have splitoffs if they include shared libraries, and comply with the full -shlibs policy if necessary. - Make sure library versions in the Shlibs: field are correct. - python modules: must comply with fink python policy - perl modules: must comply with fink perl module policy anything else I'm forgetting? :) -Ben --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay Get office equipment for less on eBay! http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
