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

[Ryan Niebur]

retitle 524650 debsums: have simpler output
tag 524650 - wontfix
thanks

(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.

Cheers,
Ryan

-- 
_________________________
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>