[Piuparts-devel] Pending mass bug filing for broken symlinks detected by piuparts

[Andreas Beckmann]

On 2013-06-01 01:54, Dave Steele wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Andreas Beckmann <anbe at debian.org> wrote:
>>
>> How many broken links are there in total?
> 
> ~2100

nice :-)

>> Can you add a list of broken symlinks? Proposed format:
>>   package: /path/to/link -> /non/existing/target
better:

    source binary /path/to/link -> /non/existing/target

> To this notice? Not recommended at first blush - they typicaly won't
> fit on one line, making the email 30-50 pages longer.

Please post to piuparts-devel or put it one some webpage.
I'd like to see three copies:
* sorted by path
* sorted by source package
* sorted by binary package

>> Maybe already include one broken link (or a pattern) in the subject.
> 
> Not recommended. They tend to be long.

350 bugs with all the same subject looks really boring - there is no
individualism
I wouldn't care about length that much if we can increase information
density
take a look at the piuparts bug history [1]

and I'd recommend using an *additional* usertag for these bugs, e.g.
"broken-symlinks" - it doesn't cost anything, but it will allow easy
filtering later on

>> How do you want to handle source packages with several binary packages
>> having broken links?
>> I'd suggest filing only one bug:

> Not my preference. If I tagged right, such problems, if they are in
> multiple binaries, are being caused independently. Better to tag them
> independently, to make sure all get fixed. If you look at the
> maintainer list, there aren't a lot of significant examples in there.

The dd-list is source package based, you can't derive anything about
binary packages from this.


Andreas