Lintian messages about cfengine-debian

[bahamat]

Commit a2b79ae cleaned up a lot of these messages.

Current lintian status:

N: Processing binary package cfengine3 (version 3.5.2-1+nmu1, arch amd64) ...
W: cfengine3: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libpromises3
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-agent
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-execd
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-key
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-monitord
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-promises
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-runagent
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-serverd
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/rpmvercmp
W: cfengine3: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/libpromises.so.3.0.5 usr/lib/libpromises.so
I: cfengine3: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libpromises.so.3.0.5
N: 1 tag overridden (1 info)

[bahamat]

Current lintian status:

N: Processing binary package cfengine3 (version 3.5.2-1+nmu1, arch amd64) ...
W: cfengine3: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libpromises3
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-agent
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-execd
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-key
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-monitord
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-promises
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-runagent
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/cf-serverd
W: cfengine3: binary-without-manpage usr/sbin/rpmvercmp
W: cfengine3: non-dev-pkg-with-shlib-symlink usr/lib/libpromises.so.3.0.5 usr/lib/libpromises.so
N: 1 tag overridden (1 info)

[tzz]

Can I assume the lintian errors are due to #40 ?

I don't think we can fix the soname, libpromises is pretty fundamental to CFEngine.

The last warning seems weird. Isn't that how you're supposed to install libraries? Or am I misunderstanding something?

[bahamat]

I think it's important to include the man pages.

For the other two, I think Debian's recomendation is that cfengine3 should be split into two separate packages. One package would be libpromises, and contain only the libpromises stuff. The second would be cfengine3 which depends on libpomises.

How crazy would it be to split it like that? If it's trivial, or very easy then I guess, why not? But if it's anything more than trivial or very easy then I would rather just override the warnings and ignore it.

[bahamat]

Also, for reference, Lintian has (at least) four types of messages. Notice, info, warning and errors.

We've never had any lintian errors, they've always been at warning or below.

[basvandervlies]

@tzz, @bahamat we can also switch to static binaries then this warning will disappear. But then we can not use the cfe-profiler.

[bahamat]

I'd like to have the option of using the profiler. There are lots of other debian packages that squelch or do nothing about each of these messages, so I'm fine doing that as well, unless there's strong objection raised by Debian.

[basvandervlies]

@bahamat +1

[tzz]

Splitting off libpromises for the sake of a warning is IMO not worth the effort, so I'll go with @bahamat

[bahamat]

In that case I'm assigning to myself and I'll configure a lintian override for those two messages.

[bahamat]

I've now merged in a new override that takes care of both of the libpromises messages. The last thing is the man pages then it'll be done.

Ted had a good idea for creating a new acceptance test that produces the man pages. I'll use that as a last resort if I can't do it directly in debian/rules.

[tzz]

I commented in cfengine/core#1059 and cfengine/core#1037 as well because they seem to be blocking each other to block the @basvandervlies patch.

[bahamat]

Since the only thing left is the missing man pages #40 specifically addresses that, I think this issue can be considered closed.