From 08d6771780b347837d6f68c6df2dc69e99dea137 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Holger Levsen Date: Sun, 24 May 2015 14:31:54 +0200 Subject: reproducible: update TODO --- TODO | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'TODO') diff --git a/TODO b/TODO index 4aecf86a..b2822e1b 100644 --- a/TODO +++ b/TODO @@ -185,6 +185,7 @@ grep '(=.*).,.$' rygel_0.24.2-1.debbindiff.html | uniq -c | sort | grep -c '^\s* ---- ** if the value is larger than 0, there are differing dependencies... ** the grepping should probably only done on files younger then $check_frequency +*** wouldnt it be easier to just compare .buildinfo files? (directly after build even) * misc ** db should get another flag, "notify_maintainer" to indicate that any status change on this package should be mailed to the maintainers+uploaders. add a script to set this flag for a.) packages b.) packages maintained by address @@ -194,12 +195,13 @@ grep '(=.*).,.$' rygel_0.24.2-1.debbindiff.html | uniq -c | sort | grep -c '^\s* ** "fork" etc/schroot/default into etc/schroot/reproducible ** repo-comparison: check for binaries without source ** move "untested" field in stats table too? (as in csv output...) +** new page: packages which are orphaned but have a reproducible usertagged patch * notes related ** #786396: classify issue by "toolchain" or "package" fix needed ** new page with annoted packages without categorized issues ** new page with notes that doesnt make sense: a.) packages which are reproducible but should not, packages that build but shouldn't, etc. -*** aint that covered by reproducible_breakages.py already? yes. are all of those covered? +*** aint that covered by reproducible_breakages.py already? no. * pkg sets related: ** replace bin/reproducible_installed_on_debian.org with a proper data provider from DSA, eg https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/mirror/debian.org.git/plain/debian/control -- cgit v1.2.3-70-g09d2