Bug#670733: Some remarks
severity 670733 important severity 672673 important severity 672666 important severity 672667 important severity 672668 important severity 672669 important severity 672670 important severity 672671 important thanks On 11/06/12 18:06, Romain Beauxis wrote: this issue is not even a RC issue because the module clearly does not fail to build in the buildds, it just fails to build with_pbuilder_. As such, I'm lowering the severity of these bugs to important. Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#672672: Bug#670733: Some remarks
severity 672672 important thanks On 12/06/12 10:19, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: On 11/06/12 18:06, Romain Beauxis wrote: this issue is not even a RC issue because the module clearly does not fail to build in the buildds, it just fails to build with_pbuilder_. As such, I'm lowering the severity of these bugs to important. #672672 too. Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#670733: Some remarks
Mehdi Dogguy me...@dogguy.org writes: As such, I'm lowering the severity of these bugs to important. There is still the question, how to solve all these Incorrectly thinks it's building as root bugs. From the arguments in this thread I conclude that the error is in pbuilder's handling of $USER and that we are not going to patch the affected packages. If nobody objects I am going to file a bug report for pbuilder with severity important and block on it. Bye, Hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#670733: Some remarks
Romain Beauxis romain.beau...@gmail.com writes: I agree that the configure test is naive, but it relies on reasonable and documented behaviours and variables. OK. What is your source of documentation for the contents of $USER? Bye, Hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#670733: Some remarks
2012/6/11 Hendrik Tews t...@os.inf.tu-dresden.de: Romain Beauxis romain.beau...@gmail.com writes: I agree that the configure test is naive, but it relies on reasonable and documented behaviours and variables. OK. What is your source of documentation for the contents of $USER? If you're talking about an official documentation that states Hey dude, USER env. variable must contain the name of the running user I have none. but I'd say it amounts to saying that water wets or fire burns. Now, as you pointed out, the variable is referred to at least here as a variable that is frequently exported by widely used command interpreters and applications: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/xbd_chap08.html A quick search also showed that there may be many other functions relaying on this variable to find our the running user, for instance: getpass.getuser() Return the “login name” of the user. Availability: Unix, Windows. This function checks the environment variables LOGNAME, USER, LNAME and USERNAME, in order, and returns the value of the first one which is set to a non-empty string. If none are set, the login name from the password database is returned on systems which support the pwd module, otherwise, an exception is raised. http://docs.python.org/library/getpass.html Finally, after a second though, this issue is not even a RC issue because the module clearly does not fail to build in the buildds, it just fails to build with _pbuilder_, which makes a huge difference.. Romain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#670733: Some remarks
Hi all, I just discovered this bug. I also wrote the configure test. The bug extends to all ocaml bindings released with liquidsoap 1.0.0 I agree that the configure test is naive, but it relies on reasonable and documented behaviours and variables. While it may be quicker for the release to patch those configure scripts, I strongly suggest fixing pbuilder instead. As such, there is nothing wrong with that test and it is my belief that the fix should be applied where it makes sense, that is to set the correct USER env. variable in pbuilder. This incorrect pbuilder behaviour appears here but may appear later in other contexts where it may be more tricky to spot... It's your guys call, but I don't think that we'll change the upstream behaviour, unless more information/arguments surface. Romain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
