Bug#1014885: Conflict: unknown-field Go-Import-Path x missing-xs-go-import-path-for-golang-package

Joao Eriberto Mota Filho

unread,

Jul 13, 2022, 2:00:03 PM7/13/22

to

Package: lintian
Version: 2.115.2
Severity: important
X-Debbugs-Cc: erib...@debian.org

Dear Maintainer,

When doing a QA revision over the package "gox", I received the warning:

W: gox source: unknown-field Go-Import-Path

However, the right field name is XS-Go-Import-Path, not Go-Import-Path. The
field is present in debian/control on gox:

XS-Go-Import-Path: github.com/mitchellh/gox

If the XS-Go-Import-Path filed is removed, the following message is shown:

I: gox source: missing-xs-go-import-path-for-golang-package

The Debian bug #984719 explains how much the XS-Go-Import-Path field is needed.

Regards,

Eriberto

Holger Levsen

unread,

Jan 18, 2023, 3:00:04 PM1/18/23

to

Hi,

I can confirm this issue for lintian 2.116.0 against src:piuparts
as it is in git or unstable.

--
cheers,
Holger

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄

First they came for the journalists, we don't know what happened after that.

signature.asc

Axel Beckert

unread,

Jan 22, 2023, 8:00:03 PM1/22/23

to

Control: clone -1 2
Control: retitle -2 lintian: Needs to distinguish between valid field names for .dsc files and for debian/control files (with vs without "XS-" prefix)
Control: tag -1 + pending
Control: tag -2 + help

Hi,

Holger Levsen wrote:
> I can confirm this issue for lintian 2.116.0 against src:piuparts
> as it is in git or unstable.

I can confirm as well. Unfortunately this is not as trivial to fix
properly as it seems:

A) Lintian currently doesn't seem to make a difference between the
fields in the .dsc file and those in the debian/control file. But
especially these XS-* fields exactly need that differentiation.

B) If I add Autobuild, Go-Import-Path, and Ruby-Versions to
data/common/source-fields, the test suite shows that then these
lintian tags would fire although they shouldn't (according to the
test suite):

adopted-extended-field (in section for source) XS-Go-Import-Path
adopted-extended-field (in section for source) XS-Autobuild

So for now I have no idea except for hardcoding these three inside the
source function in lib/Lintian/Check/Fields/Unknown.pm. But this feels
wrong.

This though might lead to false negatives if someone uses e.g.
Go-Import-Path without the "XS-" prefix in debian/control.

What would be worse: The current false positives or the potential
false negatives?

I assume that any potential false negative on these
three fields will cause package breakage at build time (wrong Ruby
versions, some Go stuff not working, non-free packages not
autobuilding, etc.), so that we can cope with them.

Cloning this bug report to document that we need a rewrite of
Lintian::Check::Fields::Unknown and module dependencies to distinguish
between .dsc fields and debian/control fields with a common subset.
And maybe with the one set being calculated from the other set by
stripping the XS- prefix.

Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE