Hi all,
I bumped into this bug while investigating what seems like a
stripped-library false positive...
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 15:12:24 +0200 Axel Beckert wrote:
thanks for the bug report. Unfortunately I don't get what actually is
the bug. Can you be a bit more verbose? Some questions below.
Le 06/01/2014 16:24, Moritz Muehlenhoff a écrit :
Le 05/03/2013 16:35, Niels Thykier a écrit :
Does ELF binaries produced by pure Ocaml have any distinct feature
that can be used to tell them apart from any other ELF binary?
ELF binaries produced by the OCaml compiler always include a bit of
Le 06/03/2013 09:37, Hendrik Tews a écrit :
In principle I agree, that programs written in a certain subset
of OCaml do not need these hardening features. However, at the
moment this safe subset is not even identified...
OCaml has a built-in notion of unsafe feature (see ocamlobjinfo
output)
Le 06/03/2013 10:48, Hendrik Tews a écrit :
OCaml has a built-in notion of unsafe feature (see ocamlobjinfo
output) that could serve as a starting point for that.
Yes, I tried this on
let f b =
let a = abcde in
let c = Obj.magic b in
String.unsafe_blit c
Le 05/03/2013 16:35, Niels Thykier a écrit :
Does ELF binaries produced by pure Ocaml have any distinct feature
that can be used to tell them apart from any other ELF binary?
ELF binaries produced by the OCaml compiler always include a bit of C
code (the runtime), so they are never actually
clone 562606 -1
reassign -1 lintian
retitle -1 add tags for needed versioned dependencies with dh_ocaml
severity -1 wishlist
thanks
Mehdi Dogguy a écrit :
dh-ocaml will not see his depends changing (just like the quilt package
do). We might correct to build-dep for OCaml (and we will certainly
Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
- when using dh --with quilt, or dh_ocaml{,init,doc}, one needs
^
I meant --with ocaml, of course.
Best regards,
--
Stéphane
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-lint-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe
Russ Allbery a écrit :
I've written a test suite for this that seems to work, although I suspect
it will throw a bunch of other errors if we add more tests for other
things in the OCaml Policy. I also tweaked the patch a bit, and it's now
committed for the next release of Lintian.
Wonderful.
Russ Allbery a écrit :
For the time being at least, I suspect we should special-case -tools and
maybe a few other similar cases (I think Policy recommends some package
names for things like this).
...and -bin, then?
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
tags 553207 + patch
thanks
Raphaël Hertzog a écrit :
This warning is wrong since with this source format the quilt
patch is auto-applied by dpkg-source -x and we don't need any special
instruction.
Attached is a patch that fixes this issue.
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
From
tags 548210 + patch
thanks
Ross Burton a écrit :
W: libgupnp-doc: lib-recommends-documentation recommends: libgssdp-doc
This is due to an error in the regexp on the package name: (?!...)
preceded by .+ is void, since .+ can match whatever is excluded by
(?!...). A simple fix is attached.
Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
I've implemented this check in the attached patch.
Here is an updated patch, thanks to Raphael Geissert's comments.
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
From c61138eb5e629d6f245ccd72f3070e4e8805b9fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stephane Glondu st...@glondu.net
Date: Sun, 19 Jul
Jeremiah Foster a écrit :
I read on debian-devel that lintian can use a subset of tags when it
checks packages. This might be a useful feature for downstream projects,
like maemo, which might be able to use only a limited amount of lintian
tags and would like to use their own.
Is
retitle 528367 new Lintian checks for OCaml packages
tags 528367 + patch
thanks
Stephane Glondu a écrit :
It would be nice to emit a Lintian error in the following circumstances:
[...]
There are of course many other checks that we (OCaml maintainers) would
like Lintian to perform. Attached are
tags 498138 + patch
thanks
Hello,
I've implemented this check in the attached patch.
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
From 21c7b134f81490a13503aeffcf553f46817e7437 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stephane Glondu st...@glondu.net
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 11:23:40 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Add check for
Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
This check is quite easy using the ocamlobjinfo tool: it prints Force
custom: YES when given a faulty .cma.
... but I doubt that we can rely on external packages from lintian
checks (lintian maintainers: can we?). So I suggest implementing the
test in pure Perl,
'
returns:
/usr/lib/ocaml/3.10.2/bjack/bjack.cma: Force custom: YES
/usr/lib/ocaml/3.10.2/ssl/ssl.cma: Force custom: YES
/usr/lib/ocaml/3.10.2/ssl/ssl_threads.cma: Force custom: YES
Cheers,
--
Stéphane Glondu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe
.
Cheers,
--
Stéphane Glondu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
18 matches
Mail list logo
