• Re: Dropping awk? (2/2)

    From Josh Triplett@1:229/2 to Adrian Bunk on Mon Apr 21 03:10:01 2025
    [continued from previous message]

    And personally, I'd likely start by putting together a `dh-shelldeps`,
    which parses shell the way that things like shellcheck does, does a
    rough approximation of "what is every program invoked by every shell
    script in the package", and looks that up in `shelldeps` metadata
    analogous to `shlibdeps`.

    Trying to officially support removing essential packages sounds to me
    like a maintainance nightmare with little benefit, you have to do some explaining how you will keep this maintainable when you do it.

    I expect it'll be maintained in much the same way most features in
    Debian are maintained: the people who use it will submit patches, report
    bugs when it doesn't work, and if they spend too much time reporting
    those bugs or find it breaking more often than they'd like, they'll
    implement more tooling (e.g. lintian checks, archive scans).

    Right now, by way of example, if your package needs tzdata, and you fail
    to depend on it, and because you have that package installed you don't
    happen to notice, and you don't have autopkgtests that exercise that
    part of the code, then there's very little to catch that. I don't think
    this will be any worse than that, in practice, and we already deal with
    that for e.g. `Priority: important` packages without substantial issues.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
  • From G. Branden Robinson@1:229/2 to Santiago Vila on Mon Apr 21 15:40:02 2025
    [continued from previous message]

    ...which I think weakens the case for your proposal helping us to have
    AWK scripts that don't exercise extensions to POSIX. (But maybe the
    newer original-awk that supports CSV data--a non-POSIX extension--fixes
    that.)

    I wonder if it'd be less effort to _review_ what AWK scripts we have
    in maintainer scripts for satisfiability by any POSIX-conforming AWK.
    How many can there be? </Jeremy Clarkson>

    Regards,
    Branden

    [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=862907
    https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=870317
    https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=961737
    https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1076035
    https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1087810
    https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1101388

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEh3PWHWjjDgcrENwa0Z6cfXEmbc4FAmgGSoAACgkQ0Z6cfXEm bc5qBRAAnThZRzharFUi2lGJVc517rBja2jsd0dBxrbBj1xEzYoIab9QrMmmHfM4 eCWbW5QD7xopy85nuxY6NCKxsXV5B8yy9ZxRqjDPJKU0xbQMZ1SoZ/iD/MB+fbb1 p2RLDdVo0LhnCL7MbAR6Zvwg/O15E408E8gAfRyw/yO05QBJAhJDK1r00NmfPpbO dNN3UU09MmVw8KWxjow9boX5veMm3S0I67gcasFSUPazRIHZ4dXy9tlsaQ9Pfnmi Y8/1qz5HzZjo3rPna0Cp7RSmcmzMleakiDV09dIQjSXGs6F7KCYxnBdWH0M2euZV wQXdzfXE38aXD4AUwpuDAedioHqAweD1Xx8JqGNASOGLUaVVAaHmySntGGnpnJOC DreowlRuIYOdgSWFHI/3yNqBRgyppckme/ySiePlRlgDoemcLf9gmDU2upzBnjOU NBomxgjFDy2Y15VCQLiZ8IsSqFfdsJOo8uAFAsTw9empSMaHIQKiYrvh+KN8Llwb D65DsAuUSpUIQWfWgPMniJWfH0tzXZwax1sdk2cIPHMlL6KDCGjTuzuqzSRl7/xH p1ji0ZfRvCkpmO6ERgmlAc4BcjomkOR012gqcpGT5dba4OAcBLZtPdv2LemcmsIZ oXz8TsAMzczRF3qIT70vwIVobmt6Luy+jTjx5hxV0YnRymGRpf4=
    =+Jot
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)