1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.BUGS.DIST

  • Bug#1104764: dpkg: Add allownetworktest to DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS

    From Pirate Praveen@21:1/5 to All on Mon May 5 23:10:01 2025
    XPost: linux.debian.maint.dpkg

    Package: dpkg
    Version: 1.22.18
    Severity: normal
    X-Debbugs-Cc: praveen@debian.org

    Dear Maintainer,

    As a followup to https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1104643#39 please add 'allownetworktest' as a supported option for DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS. So we can run tests that need internet access from salsa ci but disabled by default.


    -- System Information:
    Debian Release: trixie/sid
    APT prefers unstable
    APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
    Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

    Kernel: Linux 6.12.25-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
    Locale: LANG=C.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=C.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set
    Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
    Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
    LSM: AppArmor: enabled

    Versions of packages dpkg depends on:
    ii libbz2-1.0 1.0.8-6
    ii libc6 2.41-7
    ii liblzma5 5.8.1-1
    ii libmd0 1.1.0-2+b1
    ii libselinux1 3.8.1-1
    ii libzstd1 1.5.7+dfsg-1
    ii tar 1.35+dfsg-3.1
    ii zlib1g 1:1.3.dfsg+really1.3.1-1+b1

    dpkg recommends no packages.

    Versions of packages dpkg suggests:
    ii apt 3.0.1
    pn debsig-verify <none>

    -- no debconf information

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Guillem Jover@21:1/5 to Pirate Praveen on Tue May 6 04:00:02 2025
    XPost: linux.debian.maint.dpkg

    Hi!

    On Tue, 2025-05-06 at 02:31:31 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
    Package: dpkg
    Version: 1.22.18
    Severity: normal
    X-Debbugs-Cc: praveen@debian.org

    As a followup to https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1104643#39 please add 'allownetworktest' as a supported option for DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS. So we can run tests that need internet access from salsa ci but disabled by default.

    I suspect this report has been misdirected, because dpkg only has
    explicit support for DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS that it can act on (see for
    example dpkg-buildpackage(1) or dpkg-buildflags(1)). In this case I
    don't think there's anything that dpkg can do about this new option?

    I think this might be more appropriate as a Debian policy report,
    looking for consensus on documenting this usage, if people agree with
    it. I'd also like to mention that it might be worth diverging from
    existing practice of tucking multiple words together with no
    separators, which I've considered to be a non-ideal practice for a
    while (where I think I might have made it worse when adding support
    for new options/keywords from the original no<something> pattern).

    Thanks,
    Guillem

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)