Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 564078 - portage/repoman don't seem to validate news items
Summary: portage/repoman don't seem to validate news items
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Portage Development
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Portage team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-10-25 13:29 UTC by Julian Ospald
Modified: 2022-07-12 03:18 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Julian Ospald 2015-10-25 13:29:07 UTC 
A news item with missing author header was committed. GLEP-42 says that header is mandatory, yet the error wasn't catched anywhere it seems.

https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/f0a706b3a3d2163484b8ec6e54179958
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GLEP:42#News_Item_Headers
Comment 1 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2015-10-29 19:53:48 UTC 
i'm not sure this is a job for repoman when repoman doesn't parse news items at all.  considering the news repo has a commit hook already, why don't we update that to load+parse+reject bad news items ?
Comment 2 Julian Ospald 2015-10-30 19:29:12 UTC 
(In reply to SpanKY from comment #1)

Well, that's one way to fix it. CCing infra.
Comment 3 Michał Górny archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2015-10-30 19:37:06 UTC 
If you write the hook, we can deploy it. For current hook, look at bug 563814. While at it, you can fix that issue as well ;-P.
Comment 4 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2015-10-30 22:41:23 UTC 
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #3)

i already fixed that bug.  it's waiting for someone to review+deploy.
Comment 5 Sam James archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2022-07-12 03:18:30 UTC 
repoman support has been removed per bug 835013.

Please file a new bug (or, I suppose, reopen this one) if you feel this check is still applicable to pkgcheck and doesn't already exist.