[Build-common-hackers] a WAF class for CDBS

Rémi Thebault remi.thebault at gmail.com
Tue Dec 28 19:09:26 UTC 2010

> Ah, you are fast to adopt that new testsanity! :-)

Well by force : I had to merge it to changes I already done :-) !
This standardization idea is good anyway.

> I think maybe it is too strong to unconditionally check.  We should 
> permit our users to take off the "safety belt".

OK. Will introduce a var DEB_WAF_SKIP_CHECKSUM.

> Also, I think if we simply do checksum, it is of little help.  What 
> indirectly we want to checksum is the _contents_ of that blob.  So 
> really if we fail a build as "not properly checked for sanity" then we 
> should more clearly indicate what needs sanity checking - which isn't 
> looking at a hash, but instead is looking at some code and then 
> creating/storing a corresponding hash.

I don't get this. Do you expect a cdbs script to unpack the waf file (I
don't know the format, but it is probably not so hard)
and to checksum each file inside ?

> I suggest to create an independent target - not enabled by default until 
> fully implemented - which does checksum and unpack blob if failing.

OK Done.

> Then when good, this can be included in testsanity - conditional to some 
> variable which the user can then set if they find it sane to trust 
> upstream without this checksum.
> How does that sound?

Sounds good !

>   - Jonas
> _______________________________________________
> Build-common-hackers mailing list
> Build-common-hackers at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/build-common-hackers

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/build-common-hackers/attachments/20101228/ea84ab27/attachment.htm>

More information about the Build-common-hackers mailing list