On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 26. Februar 2009 20:20:01 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
Additionally, please check ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/sources/failed.txt
Are you sure about this list? I have checked some of my packages listed there and except of openssl all work.
Well, the error output is a LITTLE bit goofy - it includes failures for licenses, I think.
Right now, we only maintain sources for packages with licenses in LGPL, LGPL2, GPL, GPL2. If the package doesn't have one of those, it's reported as a failure. I've pushed a fix for this so that license errors are still output, but the run is counted as success.
Well, for now, at least the packages in /var/log/sourceballs should be fixed (in some cases they're just out-of-date). These are the real failiures. The rest is missing/invalid license and licenses for which we don't create sourceballs. And I would like to know who's willing to help out fixing packages with missing licenses to make sure there's no duplication of work. That's the 2 important things to do at present.
BTW, I noticed that errors.txt doesn't print the name of the package which generated the error. So it's practically useless for now. Once that'll be fixed, we'll know which packages have a missing/invalid license.
Also, failed.txt should only list the packages that have a corresponding failed log in /var/log/sourceballs. Packages with a non-GPL license shouldn't appear in it; these should appear in errors.txt only.