[pkg-go] Bug#801593: Bug#801593: Bug#801593: ratt does not find all reverse build dependencies

[Michael Stapelberg]

Thanks for the clarification. The attached patch seems to work for me. Does
it look good to you as well?

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Johannes Schauer <josch at debian.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Quoting Michael Stapelberg (2015-10-18 23:10:06)
> > I can’t figure out how to specify multiple binary packages when calling
> > dose-ceve. The manpage for -r says:
> >
> >        -r pkgspec
> >            Using the same syntax as in -c, this option use the reverse
> > dependency relation to make the transitive closure.
> >            This option can also be specified as --rcone=pkgspec.
> >
> > So the manpage for -c says:
> >
> >        -c pkgspec
> >            The match of an atomic dependency (a package name p possibly
> > together with a version constraint c) is the set of all packages in the
> > repository with name p, and a version that satisfies the constraint c.
> The
> > dependency cone of a package p is the set of all matches of all atomic
> > dependencies of p, together with their respective dependency cones.  The
> > package specification pkgspec is a list of packages (separated by a
> > semicolon), where each package is specified as follows: (name,version).
>
> Right, unfortunately it turns out that when we recently implemented the
> feature
> that the -c and -r option would take a string in the Debian dependency
> format
> when handling Debian packages, we forgot to document it :(
>
> > Now I tried specifying multiple binary packages, but couldn’t get any
> > combination to work:
> >
> > https://paste.debian.net/316796/ (so as to not make this email too long)
> >
> > So, I’m at a loss. What am I misunderstanding here? Can you please
> provide
> > an example invocation of how you think ratt should call dose-ceve in this
> > specific case?
>
> The following will work:
>
> dose-ceve --deb-native-arch=amd64 -T debsrc -r 'golang-golang-x-tools (=
> 1:0.0~git20150716.0.87156cb+dfsg1-4),golang-golang-x-tools-dev' -G pkg
> deb://Packages debsrc://Sources
>
> You can see that the format of the -r option is the same as in a Depends
> field.
>
> > Also, may I suggest the following improvements to dose-ceve:
> >
> > 1. When -r is specified multiple times, it should not overwrite the
> package
> > spec, but amend it. If you think -r should only be specified exactly
> once,
> > I suggest dose-ceve should error out when users specify multiple -r
> values.
> >
> > 2. The manpage ceve(1) should come with an example for pkgspec.
> >
> > 3. Instead of merely stating that the provided pkgspec is invalid,
> > dose-ceve should tell the user why the pkgspec is invalid, and ideally
> > include a valid example.
> >
> > (4. Possibly, the manpage ceve(1) should be worded a bit more clearly
> with
> > regards to pkgspec, but perhaps it’s just me…)
>
> No it's not just you and I agree with all your suggestions.
>
> To not forget about your valuable input, I submitted a bug to the upstream
> bugtracker:
>
>
> https://gforge.inria.fr/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=19616&group_id=4395&atid=13808
>
> Thanks!
>
> cheers, josch
>



-- 
Best regards,
Michael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-go-maintainers/attachments/20151019/d68f1306/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Use-dose-ceve-1-if-available-for-determining-revers-.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3549 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-go-maintainers/attachments/20151019/d68f1306/attachment.bin>