Bug 171962 - Make repoman check ChangeLog syntax
Bug#: 171962 Product:  Portage Development Version: 2.2 Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2
Resolution:  Assigned To: dev-portage@gentoo.org Reported By: betelgeuse@gentoo.org
Component: Repoman
URL: 
Summary: Make repoman check ChangeLog syntax
Keywords:  
Status Whiteboard: 
Opened: 2007-03-23 21:24 0000
Description:   Opened: 2007-03-23 21:24 0000 
Here is an example broken entry:

# $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/x11-libs/libXinerama/ChangeLog,v 1.27
2007/03/22 02:18:21 joshuabaergen Exp $

  22 Mar 2007; Joshua Baergen <joshuabaergen@gentoo.org>
  +libXinerama-1.0.2.ebuild:
  Version bump.  Includes new documentation and some small code tweaks.

This is missing the 

*libXinerama-1.0.2 (22 Mar 2007) 

line. Having this line is important because emerge -pl libXinerama does not
work without it.

------- Comment #1 From Petteri Räty 2007-03-23 21:26:29 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=114184) [details]
check_changelog.py

Here is the logic for checking ChangeLogs. Can be run like:

find /usr/portage/ -name "ChangeLog" | xargs python changelog.py

It seems the tree is full of broken entries atm:

betelgeuse@pena ~/python $ find /usr/portage/ -name "ChangeLog" | xargs python
changelog.py  | wc -l
2545

------- Comment #2 From Petteri Räty 2007-03-23 22:13:19 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=114194) [details]
check_changelog.py

Handle package names with + in them.

------- Comment #3 From Petteri Räty 2007-03-24 10:51:29 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=114220) [details]
check_changelog.py

Take package moves into account and check the date syntax for *foo-1.0 (date)
lines.

http://dev.gentoo.org/~betelgeuse/changelogs_syntax_errors.txt

------- Comment #4 From Zac Medico 2007-03-27 21:09:38 0000 ------- 
As discussed on irc, I'd like to add 2 new repoman checks for this:

1) Fail if a new ebuild has been added without an appropriate ChangeLog entry.
2) Warn if there are broken ChangeLog entries for previously existing ebuilds.

------- Comment #5 From Christian Faulhammer 2007-05-24 20:42:37 0000 ------- 
(In reply to comment #4)
> 1) Fail if a new ebuild has been added without an appropriate ChangeLog entry.
> 2) Warn if there are broken ChangeLog entries for previously existing ebuilds.

 What is the status?

------- Comment #6 From Marius Mauch (RETIRED) 2007-06-23 16:45:29 0000 ------- 
Do we really want to add more stuff into the current repoman incarnation? That
beast *really* needs to be rewritten.