[Pkg-rust-maintainers] Debian NEW review of rust-actix 0.13.5+ds-1: ACCEPTED

[awm at debian.org]

This is an automated message from the Debian DFSG, Licensing & New
Packages Team.

The Debian NEW review of rust-actix 0.13.5+ds-1 has been completed.

Decision: ACCEPTED
Reviewer: Andrew McMillan

Review comment:

Hi,

I've added a couple of observations to the "Common False Positives" section of the review prompt:

 - **A Rust crate's dev-dependencies missing from `Build-Depends`, with `dh $@ --buildsystem cargo`.** dh-cargo's test step runs `cargo build`, not `cargo test`, unless `rules` passes `test` to it (`dh_a uto_test -- test`), so at build time it only checks that the crate compiles, and needs no dev-depende ncy. The Rust team's packages (generated by debcargo: `debian/debcargo.toml`, an `X-Cargo-Crate` fiel d) run the test suite in autopkgtest instead, with the dev-dependencies in `debian/tests/control`; as build dependencies they would make cycles. Do not predict a build failure from this. You can read th e test step yourself: `sub test` in `/usr/share/perl5/Debian/Debhelper/Buildsystem/cargo.pm`.

- **A patch that changes a crate dependency's version requirement to the version Debian has**, even d own across a semver-incompatible version (`hashbrown` 0.17 to 0.14). Upstream crates often move to a new incompatible version without using anything new, and relaxing these requirements is most of what the Rust team's patches do, so that the archive does not need a package for every version of a crate.  The archive's build compiles the crate against the version patched in, which is the check. Report on e only if the package itself shows it cannot work (it uses an item that the version patched in lacks) , not on the change of version alone.


Hopefully that'll reduce the likelihood going forward...

Thanks!

Full review details: https://dfsg-new-queue.debian.org/reviews/rust-actix