[Reportbug-maint] Bug#322567: reportbug: [improve checking] the following files appear to be missing or changed

Ryan Niebur ryanryan52 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 4 06:10:28 UTC 2009

retitle 524650 debsums: have simpler output
tag 524650 - wontfix

(retitle made based on assumptions explained below, please set back if
I was wrong)

Hi Sandro,

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:00:25PM +0200, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> Hello Ryan,

oops, sorry, I don't know how I missed this email :/

> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 02:45, Ryan Niebur<ryanryan52 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > the debsums output already makes clear what the problem is.
> did you actually read the bug report? if so, could you please explain
> what it's "made clear" in this output:

yes, I did read the bug report. however I misunderstood what the
problem was. changing the error code would only allow you to change
the "the following files appear to be missing or changed:" string
based on what debsums found, however you want a change in the
"debsums: checksum mismatch mon file
/usr/share/doc/mon/examples/mon.cf.gz" (which debsums prints) if I
understand correctly. am I understanding correctly now?

>     Getting status for mon...
>     Verifying package integrity...
>     There may be a problem with your installation of mon;
>     the following files appear to be missing or changed:
>     debsums: checksum mismatch mon file /usr/share/doc/mon/examples/mon.cf.gz
> What is the problem? is the file missing? is the file changed? or removed?
> > how about changing this message (in reportbug):
> >
> >> the following files appear to be missing or changed:
> >
> > to:
> >
> >> debsums found the following problems with files installed from $PACKAGE:
> if you clearly state what the problem is; for example
> debsums: missing file <...>
> debsums: changed file <...>
> etc.

ok, this makes sense. I will consider whether to add a --simple-output
option, or whether I should just change the behavior (I'm thinking the
latter is fine, but want to think it through first). anyways, one way
or another I will make the output simpler to understand.

> > so that debsums can be more clear.
> that's of course welcome.
> > I don't see the need to complicate the
> > return codes just for the purpose of user output.
> what? "complicate the return codes"?
> maybe because it's the UNIX standard way to differentiate programs errors?

there's no reason why you need to know whether the problem was because
of missing files or changed files (from the reportbug point of view)
from what I can tell. if I'm wrong, tell me what behavior in reportbug
will change based on whether debsums found changed files, removed
files, or both. from what I understand, you just need debsums to print
things in a clearer wording.

> There is not only 0 and 1/-1 , there are plenty if examples out there.

debsums already has a system where it returns 0, 1, 2, or 3 based on
different errors. adding to that and accounting for all of the
combinations would get way too messy. anyways, I think this is irrelevant.

> > I do still think
> > that this buglet should be fixed and I think we can come to a
> > solution that works for everybody.
> I proposed something, you just pushed that back. Now, how do you want
> to address this bug (clear examples please)?

by changing debsums to output "debsums: missing file <...>" or
"debsums: changed file <...>", as you suggested above. will this
fully address the problem?

I also suggest that in reportbug you change the string "the following
files appear to be missing or changed:" to "debsums found the
following problems with files installed from $PACKAGE:", tho that's a
separate enhancement.


Ryan Niebur
ryanryan52 at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/reportbug-maint/attachments/20090903/f669bd4f/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Reportbug-maint mailing list