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

Jonas Smedegaard dr at jones.dk
Tue Dec 28 21:10:41 UTC 2010

On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 08:09:26PM +0100, Rémi Thebault wrote:
>> 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 ?

Nah, not checksum each file separately - unless it turns out that it is 
indeed helpful to track the contained files individually.

For now I "just" suggest to unpack the blob when failing, and emitting a 
message to first check those files, then delete them and then apply the 
magic checksum.

>> 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 !

Great.  Will you try do it?

  - Jonas

  * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
  * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/build-common-hackers/attachments/20101228/f1ea2269/attachment-0001.pgp>

More information about the Build-common-hackers mailing list