Re: How to test a solution for bug 12539

[ummeegge <ummeegge@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2403 bytes --]

Hi Adolf,

Am Donnerstag, den 26.11.2020, 23:22 +0100 schrieb Adolf Belka:
> Dear All,
> 
> I have been working on a solution for bug 12539.
> 
> With cups and cups-filters installed the services tab shows cups
> twice in the add-on list. This is because the cut command from the
> installed meta files causes both meta-cups and meta-cups-filters to
> result in cups and therefore shows up twice.
> 
> The solution seems to be to rename the Prog name from cups-filters to
> cups_filters. I made these changes in my local repo and everything
> built successfully.
> 
> However I can not figure out how to test and confirm that it has
> worked.
> If I install the built ISO and then install cups and cups_filters
> from pakfire they load the programs from the IPFire repo and
> therefore load the original versions which still have the problem and
> show up twice in the services tab.
I think you can not use Pakfire for this.

> 
> If I copy the cup and cups_filters ipfire packages and install them
> into my test bed system, the programs are installed and can be
> successfully started but because they were not installed by pakfire
> they have not been added to the installed meta files in
> /opt/pakfire/db/installed/meta-* and therefore do not show up in the
> services tab at all.
You can generate a file via 
touch /opt/pakfire/db/installed/meta-cups_filters
without PGP Signature, Name etc. but it should display it in the status
section.

But for an IPFire update i see a problem for the installed packages
since simply the name of the package has changed a '-' ≠ '_' and
therefor the name has been changed and will be handled like another
package -->
https://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=blob;f=src/pakfire/lib/functions.pl;hb=31cbb589d9c8610ba0d9b15e2cb1612ac05912a6#l647
. In my opinion, there should be a check in update.sh if the package is
present, the meta file name needs to be changed then, otherwise updates
etc. are not possible.


Can anyone help me with advice on how to be able to install these
modified add-on packages so I can check that the original problem is
actually solved by my solution, or do I have to just submit a patch and
the review of the patch will tell me if I have done it correctly or
not.

Thanks for any help/advice,

Just my two cents on that, hope it helps :-) .


Adolf


Best,

Erik