|Summary:||glsa-check should respect "count" attribute in revised|
|Product:||Portage Development||Reporter:||Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) <rbu>|
|Component:||Tools||Assignee:||Portage Tools Team <tools-portage>|
|Severity:||normal||CC:||gentoo-bugs, neysx, security|
|Package list:||Runtime testing required:||---|
|Bug Depends on:|
|Bug Blocks:||196681, 237964, 268001|
Description Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) 2008-04-18 19:25:43 UTC
Security will edit all existing GLSAs to respect the date format as defined by the DTD. This will replace all dates in the form of "January 2, 2008" by "2008-01-02". For revision counts, the "count" attribute of "revised" will be used. An example to illustrate the change: --- glsa-200401-03.xml 30 Dec 2007 03:55:42 -0000 1.2 +++ glsa-200401-03.xml 18 Apr 2008 19:23:04 -0000 @@ -10,8 +10,8 @@ malformed query string was sent. </synopsis> <product type="ebuild">mod_python</product> - <announced>January 27, 2004</announced> - <revised>December 30, 2007: 02</revised> + <announced>2004-01-27</announced> + <revised count="02">2007-12-30</revised> <bug>39154</bug> <access>remote</access> <affected> It should be Portage maintainer's decision which date format glsa-check should display. However, revision count parsing should be changed.
Comment 1 firstname.lastname@example.org 2008-04-21 00:31:11 UTC
Created attachment 150469 [details, diff] glsa_separate_count.diff I can't seem to figure out how glsa-check uses the count. Line 485 of glsa.py is the only time glsa-check actually touches the revised element afaict. The attached diff is incomplete, but I didn't want to go forward until I really understood the problem -- What it *should* do (untested) is separate the count from the revised /date/ regardless of the format. Currently it does nothing with the count. Did you want something like this?
Comment 2 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) 2008-04-21 10:40:43 UTC
The count should probably be displayed behind the date as before ("outstream.write("Last revised on: %s\n\n" % self.revised)") The case "# No count found, not sure how to handle..." should assume count = 01.
Comment 3 email@example.com 2008-04-22 01:38:38 UTC
Created attachment 150552 [details, diff] glsa_separate_count.diff OK. No guarantees that this code is exactly right, but it should be very close...
Comment 4 Allen Brooker (AllenJB) 2008-12-31 18:16:14 UTC
What's the current status of this issue? What's holding it up? There's a bunch of improvements for the Gentoo websites being held up by this from the looks of the dep graph.
Comment 5 Xavier Neys (RETIRED) 2008-12-31 20:06:40 UTC
(In reply to comment #4) > What's the current status of this issue? What's holding it up? > > There's a bunch of improvements for the Gentoo websites being held up by this > from the looks of the dep graph. Not if you care to read the comments on the bugs along this graph. Dependency must remain so that the xsl can be simplified and cleaned up once the security team has managed to solve their part.
Comment 6 Paul Varner (RETIRED) 2009-05-18 22:12:37 UTC
gentoolkit-0.2.4.4 and gentoolkit-0.3.0_rc6 released.