NetBSD Problem Report #50697

From kre@munnari.OZ.AU  Sat Jan 23 16:34:38 2016
Return-Path: <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [199.233.217.200])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "mail.netbsd.org", Issuer "Postmaster NetBSD.org" (verified OK))
	by mollari.NetBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A49DD7ABDE
	for <gnats-bugs@www.NetBSD.org>; Sat, 23 Jan 2016 16:34:38 +0000 (UTC)
Message-Id: <201601231633.u0NGXTOw007516@andromeda.noi.kre.to>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:33:29 +0700 (ICT)
From: kre@munnari.OZ.AU
To: gnats-bugs@www.NetBSD.org
Subject: databases/databases/py-postgresql distfile checksum error
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.95

>Number:         50697
>Category:       pkg
>Synopsis:       databases/databases/py-postgresql distfile checksum error
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    darcy
>State:          closed
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Sat Jan 23 16:35:00 +0000 2016
>Closed-Date:    Wed Apr 06 10:46:24 +0000 2016
>Last-Modified:  Wed Apr 06 10:55:00 +0000 2016
>Originator:     Robert Elz
>Release:        NetBSD 7.99.25 (irrelevant)  pkgsrc -current 2016-01-23
>Organization:
	Prince of Songkla University
>Environment:
System: NetBSD andromeda.noi.kre.to 7.99.25 NetBSD 7.99.25 (VBOX64-1.1-20160118) #42: Tue Jan 19 06:18:41 ICT 2016 kre@onyx.coe.psu.ac.th:/usr/obj/current/kernels/amd64/VBOX64 amd64
Architecture: x86_64
Machine: amd64
>Description:
	After the recent upgrade, databases/py-postgresql expects (from
	the distinfo file) a source file that is 477245 octets.  The
	source file fetched from the master site is actually 1355824 octets.
	Needless to say the checksums don't match.   This difference is
	too much for it just to be some minor adjustment made by the
	upstream maintainers, but I will leave it to someone else to
	figure out what happened.

>How-To-Repeat:
	If you have the distfile already, move it

	cd ..../pkgsrc/databases/py-postgresql
	make checksum

>Fix:

>Release-Note:

>Audit-Trail:

Responsible-Changed-From-To: pkg-manager->darcy
Responsible-Changed-By: wiz@NetBSD.org
Responsible-Changed-When: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 19:35:54 +0000
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer


State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: darcy@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 13:57:45 +0000
State-Changed-Why:
This was fixed Jan 24, 2016.


From: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: pkg/50697 (databases/databases/py-postgresql distfile checksum error)
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2016 13:58:39 +0700

     Date:        Sun, 20 Mar 2016 13:57:45 +0000 (UTC)
     From:        darcy@NetBSD.org
     Message-ID:  <20160320135745.9EEA07ABDE@mollari.NetBSD.org>

   | Synopsis: databases/databases/py-postgresql distfile checksum error
   | State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
   | This was fixed Jan 24, 2016.

 Sorry, I missed spotting this message when it happened - only seeing it
 in the periodic "Reminder of ..." message let me know to go and look.

 I also don't understand why feedback state for this one, if it is fixed
 (which I agree it is) then it is fixed, just close the PR.   Feedback
 state really should only get used when you aren't sure that the fix
 solves the problem, or when you are unable to see the problem and need
 more info, or ...

 In any case, please close this one.

 kre

State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed
State-Changed-By: darcy@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Wed, 06 Apr 2016 10:46:24 +0000
State-Changed-Why:
Fixed.


From: "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@NetBSD.org>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: kre@munnari.OZ.AU, gnats-admin@netbsd.org, pkgsrc-bugs@netbsd.org
Subject: Re: pkg/50697 (databases/databases/py-postgresql distfile checksum
 error)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 06:53:30 -0400

 On Tue,  5 Apr 2016 07:00:01 +0000 (UTC)
 Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> wrote:
 >  I also don't understand why feedback state for this one, if it is
 > fixed (which I agree it is) then it is fixed, just close the PR.
 > Feedback state really should only get used when you aren't sure that
 > the fix solves the problem, or when you are unable to see the problem
 > and need more info, or ...

 Actually, the rule is "Once the implementation of the fix is completed
 and communicated to the PR submitter, the PR state should be changed to
 feedback, awaiting response from the PR submitter that the fix really
 works."  The rule doesn't leave room for judgment by the fixer.  This
 makes sense as otherwise different people will make different calls as
 to where to draw the line.  I agree that it seems like overkill in this
 case but it is our documented process.

 I have closed the PR now.  Thanks for submitting it.

 -- 
 D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@NetBSD.org>
 http://www.NetBSD.org/ IM:darcy@Vex.Net

>Unformatted:

Home	PR Database Search