Переглянути джерело

dpkg(1): Move the explanation of functional checks to the --verify command

It makes more sense to have it in the --verify command description than
on the --verify-format one.

Closes: #747264
Guillem Jover 12 роки тому
батько
коміт
07a39b75cc
2 змінених файлів з 8 додано та 2 видалено
  1. 2 0
      debian/changelog
  2. 6 2
      man/dpkg.1

+ 2 - 0
debian/changelog

@@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ dpkg (1.17.11) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
   * Automatically add the Testsuite field in dpkg-source to the .dsc file.
   * Automatically add the Testsuite field in dpkg-source to the .dsc file.
   * Spell nocheck option in dpkg-scanpackages wait_child() call correctly.
   * Spell nocheck option in dpkg-scanpackages wait_child() call correctly.
     Spotted by James McCoy <jamessan@debian.org> (in devscripts).
     Spotted by James McCoy <jamessan@debian.org> (in devscripts).
+  * Move the explanation of functional checks from --verify-format to the
+    --verify command in the dpkg(1) man page. Closes: #747264
 
 
   [ Updated programs translations ]
   [ Updated programs translations ]
   * Danish (Joe Dalton). Closes: #754127
   * Danish (Joe Dalton). Closes: #754127

+ 6 - 2
man/dpkg.1

@@ -212,6 +212,11 @@ of the files metadata information in the database is the binary packages
 themselves. That metadata gets collected at package unpack time during
 themselves. That metadata gets collected at package unpack time during
 the installation process.
 the installation process.
 
 
+Currently the only functional check performed is an md5sum verification
+against the stored value in the files database. It will only get checked
+if the database contains the file md5sum. To check for any missing
+metadata in the database, the \fB\-\-audit\fP command can be used.
+
 The output format is selectable with the \fB\-\-verify\-format\fP
 The output format is selectable with the \fB\-\-verify\-format\fP
 option, which by default uses the \fBrpm\fP format, but that might
 option, which by default uses the \fBrpm\fP format, but that might
 change in the future, and as such, programs parsing this command
 change in the future, and as such, programs parsing this command
@@ -640,8 +645,7 @@ of a line for every path that failed any check. The lines start with 9
 characters to report each specific check result, a '\fB?\fP' implies the
 characters to report each specific check result, a '\fB?\fP' implies the
 check could not be done (lack of support, file permissions, etc), '\fB.\fP'
 check could not be done (lack of support, file permissions, etc), '\fB.\fP'
 implies the check passed, and an alphanumeric character implies a specific
 implies the check passed, and an alphanumeric character implies a specific
-check failed; currently the only functional check is an md5sum verification
-against the stored value in the files database, denoted with a '\fB5\fP' on
+check failed; the md5sum verification is denoted with a '\fB5\fP' on
 the third character. The line is followed by a space and an attribute
 the third character. The line is followed by a space and an attribute
 character (currently '\fBc\fP' for conffiles), another
 character (currently '\fBc\fP' for conffiles), another
 space and the pathname.
 space and the pathname.