Many packages in Salix have invalid install/slack-desc files

General talk about packaging procedures and packages.
Post Reply
ruario
Posts: 88
Joined: 23. Dec 2010, 08:41

Many packages in Salix have invalid install/slack-desc files

Post by ruario » 17. Apr 2013, 10:52

There are currently 262 packages in Salix 14.0 with incorrect formatting in the first line of their slack-desc files. The first line should look like this:

Code: Select all

package: package (Description of the package)
However in many of the Salix packages it looks like one of the following:

Code: Select all

package: package 

Code: Select all

package: package Description of the package

Code: Select all

package: package - Description of the package
If you install any of these packages with Slackware's original Pkgtools using the --terse option their names will not display correctly.

P.S. These are the 262 packages that I noticed: 2H4U, Xdialog, a52dec, agave, bootchart, burncenter, dosbox, dupedit, faac, faad2, galculator, gentium-font, gnome-mime-data, gtkballs, keepassx, lash, libcdaudio, libdca, libdv, libffado, libglademm, libiec61883, libmpeg2, libreoffice-help-*, lxmenu-data, mountshare-spacefm, mozilla-firefox-l10n-*, obsidian-cursors, racket, rarian, razorqt, slk-pkgcheck, speex, terminator, vanilla-dmz-cursors, vlc, vobcopy, wv, xrick

User avatar
gapan
Salix Wizard
Posts: 5536
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 17:40

Re: Many packages in Salix have invalid install/slack-desc f

Post by gapan » 17. Apr 2013, 17:56

I don't think that's a problem. There are a lot of slackware packages that break that "rule" too (if it can be called anything like that).

If anything, this could be a bug with the installpkg --terse option. It expects a certain formatting, while not every package has that, not even in slackware.
Image
Image

ruario
Posts: 88
Joined: 23. Dec 2010, 08:41

Re: Many packages in Salix have invalid install/slack-desc f

Post by ruario » 17. Apr 2013, 20:05

Hmm ... interesting, it seems you are correct. There are 192 of them. I must admit I did not check previously. I assumed I would have noticed as I often use terse when making chroots. Though my chroots tend to be minimal so presumably I didn't hit any of those packages.

User avatar
gapan
Salix Wizard
Posts: 5536
Joined: 6. Jun 2009, 17:40

Re: Many packages in Salix have invalid install/slack-desc f

Post by gapan » 18. Apr 2013, 07:11

Out of the back of my mind, it should be at least almost everything under slackware/x.
Image
Image

Post Reply